Independent candidate R K Anand, who lost the Rajya Sabha election in Haryana last week in the midst of an ink row, today filed a police complaint against winning candidate Subhash Chandra, a ruling BJP MLA and some others alleging that a criminal conspiracy was hatched that led to his defeat.
A lawyer, Anand, in his complaint to Chandigarh’s IGP, Tajender Singh Luthra, has levelled charges against various persons and demanded they be booked under various sections of the IPC and under the provisions of the Representation of the People Act, 1951.
He filed the complaint against the BJP backed winning Independent candidate and media baron Chandra, BJP MLA from Ambala Aseem Goel, Independent MLA Jai Parkash and certain officials from the office of Returning Officer and other unknown persons.
Claiming that a wrong pen was given to his supporting Congress MLAs so that votes can be rejected, Anand has said “that even authorised agents could not distinguish the ink through naked eye. Otherwise they could have pointed out that fact to their MLAs. The inks were not red or green and violet. Those were violet and royal blue and both were from sketchpens.
“The distinguishing colour of both was so narrow that even experienced people could not spot the difference.
“At the time of counting, only 4 ballots were identified by naked eyes. However, on repeated pointing out by Subhash Chandra and with the help of extra light, further ballots having different inks were identified. Subhash Chandra knew well before that there were 12 ballots with royal blue sketch pen,” Anand has alleged.
“It is a clear case of fraud played on Election Commission and on the Congress voters to mislead them to mark their ballot without knowing as to which is the original pen. They presumed that the pen on the table is the pen supplied by Returning Officer for marking on the ballot,” he stated.
He said all the 12 voters whose votes got cancelled had marked their ballot papers with one and the same pen.
“All these voters were duped to vote by the changed pen would also be apparent from the fact that all these ballot papers had the preference markings by the same pen. How one pen could be used for marking by all Congress MLAs unless the same pen is available on the table inside the polling booth.
“All these 12 voters had voted for me and had not marked any other preference,” he claimed.