Jailed former BJP MLA Kanwarlal Meena approaches Rajasthan Governor for pardon
The former Anta (Baran) MLA's Assembly membership was terminated last month after he failed to get relief from the High Court — the Supreme Court, too, dismissed his petition — in a 2005 case related to threatening a government official. A delay in the termination of his membership had led to a political slugfest between the ruling BJP and the Opposition Congress, with the latter alleging partisan action by Assembly Speaker Vasudev Devnani.
Meena has now 'moved a mercy petition before Governor Haribhau Bagade for pardon of his sentence'.
As part of the process, the opinion of the concerned police officials in Jhalawar, where the 2005 case was lodged, has been sought.
Jhalawar Superintendent of Police Richa Tomar has sent letters to Station House Officers of Manohar Thana and Aklera police stations, asking them for their opinion, along with comments of the Circle Officer. The letter, sent Thursday, instructs the SHOs to give 'top priority' to the matter and 'ensure that the information is submitted today itself under all circumstances'. The SP said the opinion of the district police was also in the process of being sent.
At the end of a Supreme Court-stipulated two-week relief, the convicted MLA had surrendered before a Manohar Thana court in Jhalawar on May 21.
Meena was found guilty under IPC Sections 353 (assault or criminal force to deter a public servant), 506 (criminal intimidation), and the Prevention of Damage to Public Property (PDPP) Act. He was sentenced to three years' rigorous imprisonment for the last two charges and two years for IPC 353, to be served concurrently. As per Section 8(3) of the Representation of the People (RP) Act of 1951, conviction of a lawmaker for an offence with a two-year sentence or more leads to disqualification from the House. Additionally, the person cannot contest for six years after the date of completion of their sentence.
The case in which Meena was disqualified pertains to February 2005, when Ramniwas Mehta, then an RAS officer and posted as Sub Divisional Officer, Aklera, was informed of a group of people in Manohar Thana, Jhalawar, blocking the road to demand re-poll in a sarpanch election. When Mehta and others reached the spot, Meena, who arrived with six-seven men in a vehicle about half an hour later, took out a revolver and allegedly aimed it at Mehta's head asking him to 'announce a re-poll within two minutes or get killed'.
Mehta, as per records, told Meena, 'A revolver can kill but not enforce a re-poll.' Mehta, who has been promoted as an IAS officer, is currently posted as Secretary, Rajasthan Public Service Commission (RPSC). During the hearing in the Supreme Court, the three-member Bench was told that Meena has had 27 cases against him. His lawyers had told The Indian Express that he was acquitted in almost all these cases.
His Assembly membership was terminated on May 23, on a day when Leader of Opposition Tika Ram Jully filed a petition in the High Court against the delay in termination of his membership. Ever since the High Court had upheld his conviction in early May, Congress leaders had accused Speaker Devnani of partisanship and approached the Chief Secretary, the Election Commission, and the Governor.
An influential leader in Jhalawar region, Meena is considered close to former chief minister Vasundhara Raje.
Sources said that some party leaders were keen to seek a pardon or commutation of Meena's sentence to under two years by the Governor before the termination of his membership. However, it may have sent a wrong message and may have led to a protracted legal battle, too, they said. Now, following the termination of his membership, the same path through Article 161 of the Constitution has been adopted. Article 161 empowers Governors to 'grant pardons, etc., and to suspend, remit or commute sentences in certain cases'.
The bypoll for Anta Assembly seat is yet to be announced.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Hindustan Times
18 minutes ago
- Hindustan Times
Do not use name of living personalities in govt ads: Madras HC
Bengaluru The Madras high court has said that political parties cannot use names or images of any living personality, including chief ministers and ideological leaders, as well as party insignia or symbols, in government advertisements for welfare schemes. Do not use name of living personalities in govt ads: Madras HC A bench of Chief Justice Manindra Mohan Shrivastava and Justice Sunder Mohan barred the inclusion of 'the name of any living personality, photographs of former chief ministers or ideological leaders,' and 'party symbols, emblems, or flags of political parties,' including those of the ruling DMK in Tamil Nadu, in advertisements for government welfare schemes. The bench passed the order on July 31 while hearing a petition filed by AIADMK Member of Parliament C Ve Shanmugam, who had sought an injunction against the DMK government's use of Chief Minister MK Stalin's name and image, as well as the images of other DMK leaders, in the State's public grievance redressal scheme 'Mudhalvarin Mugavari.' Senior counsel Vijay Narayan, who appeared for Shanmugam, told the court that using the chief minister's name and party images in a state-funded scheme violated Supreme Court directives and the Government Advertisement (Content Regulation) Guidelines, 2014. The court said that the use of such references in state-sponsored promotions did 'prima facie' violate multiple apex court rulings, including the latter's clarification issued in 2016 on the review petition filed in the case of State of Karnataka vs Common Cause. In such order, the Supreme Court had clarified that while the photograph of an incumbent chief minister may be used in official government advertisements, photographs of ideological leaders or former chief ministers will prima facie violate its earlier directives aimed at curbing political misuse of public funds, the high court said. 'It would not be permissible to mention the name of the living political personality in the nomenclature of the government scheme. Moreover, using the name of any ruling political party, its insignia/logo/emblem/flag also appears to be prima facie against the directives of the Supreme Court and the Election Commission of India,' the high court said. It said that keeping in mind the above, it was passing an order 'to the effect that while launching and operating government welfare schemes through various advertisements, the name of any living personality, photograph of any former Chief Minister/ideological leaders or party insignia/emblem/flag of respondent No.4 (DMK) shall not be included.' Opposing the plea, the state's counsel, Advocate General P S Raman, had argued that the petition relied on unauthenticated materials such as unofficial printouts, which did not represent official government publications. Raman assured the court that the government had not used the photographs of any political leaders or party symbols in its promotional materials and requested time to file a detailed affidavit along with authentic records. Senior advocate P Wilson, who was representing the DMK, told the court the petition was politically motivated. Wilson pointed out that the petitioner belonged to the opposition and alleged that the plea was an attempt to 'malign' the ruling party's image 'under the guise of public interest.' While recording that the State denied the petitioner's claims, the court emphasised the importance of adhering to the legal framework governing government publicity. The Bench said it was 'inclined to pass an interim order' given the petitioner's apprehension that more such schemes were in the pipeline. However, the court clarified that its present order did not interfere with the actual launch or implementation of any welfare scheme. 'We have not passed any order against launching, implementation or operation of welfare schemes of the government,' the bench said. The court also made it clear that the pendency of the petition will not restrain the Election Commission of India or other competent authorities from taking action on the basis of the petitioner's complaint. The court is likely to hear the matter further on August 13.
The Print
18 minutes ago
- The Print
Malegaon blast probe politics will simmer till Maharashtra polls
A trial court in Mumbai gave its judgment on the case Thursday, acquitting all seven accused, including former Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) MP Pragya Singh Thakur, saying there was strong suspicion, but not enough evidence to convict them. And, the most unfortunate part is that nobody seems to be interested in finding out, least of all the government. An explosive went off during the holy month of Ramadan in Maharashtra's Malegaon in 2008. Six people died. Almost a hundred others were injured. It's been 17 years, but in the eyes of the judiciary, there are still no answers as to who was responsible for the attack. The court ordered compensation of Rs 2 lakh to the families of those who died in the attack, and Rs 50,000 for the families of those injured. But it is too little, too late. The Malegaon blast case has, after all, been a victim of politics, and justice or closure has been the biggest casualty. For this reason, the Malegaon blast verdict is ThePrint's 'Newsmaker of the Week.' 'Saffron terror' politics The Malegaon case has been in the public discourse for 17 years, more for the politics surrounding it than for any significant details regarding the investigation process. The probe in the immediate aftermath of the blasts, under the Maharashtra Anti Terrorism Squad (ATS) and its former chief Hemant Karkare, had led to the arrests of a bunch of Hindutva activists, including Pragya Singh Thakur, as well as Lt Colonel Prasad Purohit, an Army officer. The accused were said to be linked to a Hindu fundamentalist group, Abhinav Bharat. India had seen a fair number of terror attacks across the country in 2008, raising questions on the efficiency of the home ministry under the United Progressive Alliance (UPA) government. The initial revelations in the Malegaon probe gave a political opportunity to the Congress to turn the narrative. The party raised red flags on terrorism allegedly sponsored by Hindutva organisations, with some senior leaders such as P Chidambaram, Digvijaya Singh, and Sushilkumar Shinde using the word 'saffron terror'. They blamed the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) and the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS) for allegedly encouraging such fringe Hindutva groups. These strong statements had at the time sparked a debate on how the term 'saffron terror' defames the entire Hindu religion and how terror should not be seen through the lens of any religious colour. The BJP and RSS, meanwhile, slammed the Congress for allegedly trying to appease the minorities. Karkare was killed in the 2008 Mumbai attacks. His death too became politically controversial as the Union Minority Affairs Minister AR Antulay, a Congressman from Maharashtra, suggested that there could be a larger controversy behind the IPS officer's death. Thursday's verdict came as vindication for the BJP's political narrative, with party leaders blaming the Congress for allegedly casting Hindus in a bad light, asking for an apology. It was ironic. The government's law enforcement agency had lost a case. It had failed to show sufficient evidence to get a conviction, despite having 17 years, over ten of which were under a BJP-led government at the Centre. And yet, those in power were celebrating. Also read: Fauja Singh's death shows Indian roads remain a national emergency—474 lives lost every day Opposition busy trying to get script right After the verdict, several Congress leaders asked if Pragya Singh Thakur and others are now acquitted, then who was behind the blast? However, the question was blunted by their more emphatic attempts at distancing the Congress from the term 'saffron terror'. Talking about 'saffron terror' in a Hindu-majority democracy had hurt the Congress even back then. In today's scenario, where the BJP has been working with every small spiritual and religious outfit on the ground to consolidate the Hindutva voter base, the consequences could be even worse. So, one after the other, leaders of the Congress tried to make all the right noises, loudly speaking about how they had never coined the term 'saffron terror,' how terror has no religion, and how Congress condemns all acts of terror. The question that should have been the loudest of all—who committed the crime—came out barely as a whimper. The Shiv Sena (Uddhav Balasaheb Thackeray) questioned the failure of the government's law enforcement agencies with two back-to-back acquittals in terror cases—first the 2006 Mumbai train blasts and now the 2008 Malegaon blast. However, it stopped short of asking or even suggesting that the National Investigation Agency (NIA) should appeal against the trial court's decision in a higher court. After all, back in 2008, when the Shiv Sena was still undivided under Bal Thackeray's leadership and was a BJP ally, it had openly supported the Malegaon blast accused. On one occasion, party workers had even showered flower petals over the accused outside a Nashik courtroom. Last month, after the Bombay High Court tore into the Maharashtra ATS over the 2006 Mumbai train blasts probe and acquitted all 12 accused, all of whom were Muslims, the Maharashtra government promptly appealed in the Supreme Court. Now that an NIA trial court has done the same in the Malegaon blast case, neither the government nor the agency has shown any urgency in appealing to a higher court. The NIA has said it will decide whether to appeal after studying the order. The political pandemonium will continue as Maharashtra gears up for urban and rural local body polls sometime next year. For the victims and their families, any closure still seems to be a long way off. (Edited by Ratan Priya)
Hindustan Times
18 minutes ago
- Hindustan Times
Ex-SSP, DSP among 5 Punjab cops convicted in '93 Tarn Taran fake encounter case
A Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) court on Friday convicted five retired Punjab Police officials, including a former senior superintendent of police (SSP) and a deputy superintendent of police (DSP), in a 32-year-old fake encounter case involving the killing of seven youths of Rani Willa village in Tarn Taran district in 1993. Family members of the victims were present in court during the verdict and welcomed the judgment. (HT Photo) The court found them guilty of criminal conspiracy, murder, destruction of evidence and forgery under various sections of the Indian Penal Code (IPC). The quantum of the sentence will be pronounced on August 4. Those convicted include former SSP Bhupinderjit Singh (61), former DSP Davinder Singh (58), former inspector Suba Singh (83), assistant sub-inspectors (ASIs) Gulabarg Singh (72) and Raghbir Singh (63). Following the verdict, all five were taken into custody. The verdict was pronounced by special CBI judge Baljinder Singh Sara in the case, which involved the abduction, illegal detention, custodial torture and staged killings of seven youths — including three special police officers (SPOs) — from Rani Willa village in Tarn Taran district in 1993. According to the CBI investigation, the chain of events began on June 27, 1993, when a police team led by Sarhali station house officer inspector Gurdev Singh (who died during the course of trial) abducted SPO Shinder Singh and others from the residence of contractor Joginder Singh. They were taken to Sarhali police station where they were tortured and falsely implicated in a robbery case. Subsequently, on July 2, 1993, police lodged a fake FIR claiming that Shinder and the others had absconded with government-issued weapons. Ten days later on July 12, a police party led by then DSP Bhupinderjit Singh (who retired as SSP) and inspector Gurdev Singh staged a fake encounter. The police claimed that the victims were killed in crossfire while attempting to recover stolen arms from 'terrorists'. The bodies were cremated as 'unclaimed', despite being identified by ASIs Gulabarg Singh and Davinder Singh (who retired as a DSP). Postmortem revealed signs of severe torture prior to death, and forensic analysis of the seized arms pointed to serious discrepancies, according to the probe. On July 28, 1993, three more abducted individuals — Sukhdev Singh, Sarabjit Singh, and Harvinder Singh — were reportedly killed in a second staged encounter by the Verowal police. According to investigators, fake recoveries and fabricated documents were used to justify these killings as anti-terror operations. The court said both the encounters were conducted under the supervision of then DSP Bhupinderjit Singh and other convicts were part of the police team. The case was handed over to the CBI following a Supreme Court directive on December 12, 1996, in connection with the mass cremation of unidentified bodies in Punjab. A preliminary inquiry began in 1997 and a formal case was registered in 1999 based on the testimony of Narinder Kaur, wife of Shinder Singh. Counsel of the victims Sarabjit Singh Verka said the CBI had listed 67 witnesses, but delays in the trial between 2010 and 2021 led to the deaths of 36 of them. Only 28 testified before the court. 'Justice has been delayed, but not denied. The families waited 32 years for this day,' Verka said. Family members of the victims present in court during the verdict were visibly emotional. Many welcomed the judgment with tears and expressed relief that justice had finally been served.
