Gujarat Congress chief Shaktisinh Gohil claimed on Sunday that the nomination forms of the party's candidate from Surat Lok Sabha constituency were rejected at the behest of the BJP over its alleged fear of apparent electoral defeat in the Lok Sabha election.
Describing the incident as an "assault on democracy," Gohil stated that Congress would challenge the decision of the Returning Officer to invalidate Nilesh Kumbhani's nomination form due to purported inconsistencies in proposers' signatures, news agency PTI reported.
Additionally, Suresh Padsala's nomination form as a substitute candidate from Surat was also rejected. The Returning Officer, Sourabh Pardhi, cited discrepancies in the signatures of proposers and deemed them non-genuine as the reason for rejection.
"The BJP is rattled as it has realised that the situation is not favourable for them this time (in elections). It hatched a conspiracy to get the forms of Congress candidates cancelled by hook or by crook. Kumbhani was their target ever since he filed his nomination form because BJP sensed defeat in Surat seat," Gohil said, PTI reported.
ALSO READ: 'My Name Is Arvind Kejriwal And I Am Not A Terrorist': Delhi CM's Message From Jail
He alleged that the BJP attempted to threaten Kumbhani. He further claimed attempts to intimidate Kumbhani and highlighted that the nomination form cannot be annulled solely based on proposers' claims regarding signature authenticity.
According to the Returning Officer's affidavits, the proposers denied signing the forms themselves.
Gujarat Congress Chief Shaktisinh Gohil Says Party Will Approach Supreme Court
In addition, Gohil asserted that despite two proposers claiming not to have signed his nomination form, the Aam Aadmi Party's candidate for the Surat-East assembly seat in the 2022 elections did not have his nomination form revoked.
"The returning officer had refused to cancel the nomination form, saying discrepancies in the proposers' signatures cannot be the basis for the cancellation of the form," alleged Gohil.
"At that time, the form was not rejected because the AAP candidate would have helped the BJP by splitting votes. But this time, our form was rejected at the behest of BJP because the ruling party realised that it was going to lose Surat's seat in the Lok Sabha elections," the Congress leader stated. He asked the Election Commission to look into the matter.
"This is a murder of democracy. We will file a petition in the High Court against this order (of the Returning Officer) and also knock on the doors of the Supreme Court if needed," Gohil said.
He reiterated that the returning officer ought to have enlisted the aid of forensic specialists to compare the proposers' signatures on the nomination form with those on their affidavits, which they subsequently submitted and in which they denied having signed the form.
"The returning officer could have taken the help of handwriting experts to find out if the signatures in the form were genuine or forged. Moreover, the law does not have a provision to cancel the nomination form on this basis. The Election Commission can file a case of forgery if it wants, but it cannot cancel the form. Thus, Kumbhani's form has been cancelled illegally," Gohil also said.
Following his objection to Kumbhani's nomination forms on Saturday, Dinesh Jodhani, the election agent for Mukesh Dalal, the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) candidate from Surat, allowed the returning officer to give the Congress candidate an extension to appear before it on Sunday morning to make his case.
In his response, Kumbhani submitted that the proposers had put their signatures in his presence, and a handwriting expert should examine their signatures. "They also should be cross-examined for the benefit of justice," he added.
After reviewing the proposers' affidavits and pertinent documentation, confirming the proposers' identities, and making sure they were not under duress or threat, the returning officer issued an order rejecting the nomination forms.
The Returning Officer said that not even the signatories' presence could be detected in the video footage that was reviewed at the Congress candidate's attorney's request.