soren: Jharkhand CM Hemant Soren ‘denies and disputes all BJP allegations’ in letter to EC

Jharkhand Chief Minister Hemant Soren submitted his reply to the Election Commission on Monday evening in the mining lease allocation case and sought more time. The Election Commission had issued a notice to him asking why he should not be disqualified under Section 9A of the Representation of the People Act, 1951 in the matter of allotment of mining leases when he was the minister in charge of mining. The Election Commission had given him time till May 10 to reply.

In his reply, Soren denies all allegations that call for disqualification under the RP Act.

“I refute and dispute all allegations of the BJP regarding my alleged disqualification to be a member of the Jharkhand Legislative Assembly on the ground of a mining lease obtained by me in May 2021 under the said section 9A of the Representation of the People Act, 1951, Or any ground,” Soren wrote in the letter.

He sought at least four weeks’ time from the Election Commission on the ground that his 67-year-old mother was unwell and was taken to Hyderabad for treatment on April 28 and is still hospitalised. Soren said that he spent more time in Hyderabad due to which he could not engage a suitable legal counsel to effectively present his defense before the Election Commission.

He wrote that he has been provided with about 600 pages of documents received by the Election Commission from the Chief Secretary of Jharkhand. “Almost all the documents are in Hindi, and I have to arrange for their transliteration from Hindi to English by my legal counsel for proper appreciation and understanding of the contents, meaning and meaning of the documents which I am representing as my defense counsel. I can attach.” He has written.

Soren also requested that he should be given an opportunity of personal hearing by the Election Commission through his legal counsel before the Commission prepares its opinion on the matter for submission to the Governor.

Soren had sought legal opinion from former CJI VN Khare in his case. After going through all the documents, Khare said that the provisions of Section-9A of the RP Act 1951 would not be applicable in this case.

“Any action under consideration would be unconstitutional, illegal, arbitrary and contrary to the established and consistent views of the Supreme Court of India,” Khare wrote.

Originally published at Pen 18