SC dismisses PIL seeking disqualification of Bihar CM Nitish Kumar

It was alleged that Nitish Kumar had concealed a criminal case against him while filing his election affidavit.

Bihar CM Nitish Kumar (Image: File-PTI)

New Delhi: In a major relief to the Bihar CM Nitish Kumar, the Supreme Court on Monday dismissed a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) seeking his disqualification from the Bihar Legislative Council, for allegedly concealing a criminal case against him . It was alleged that Nitish Kumar had concealed criminal cases against him while filing election affidavit with the Election Commission. The PIL was filed by lawyer Manohar Lal Sharma.

Supreme Court dismissed the PIL filed by lawyer Manohar Lal Sharma seeking disqualification of Bihar Chief Minister Nitish Kumar. In the PIL, it was alleged that Nitish Kumar had concealed in his election affidavit that a criminal case was pending against him.

— ANI (@ANI) March 19, 2018

The PIL had been pending in the apex court since four months and a response from the Election Commission in this regard was sought. It has been dismissed only after the prompt reply from the EC. Coming to Kumar’s rescue, Election Commission has stated that the allegation of Nitish Kumar concealing information in his affidavit, does not hold true. EC asserted that at the time when the affidavit was being filed, Nitish did not have any criminal case against him. It is pertinent to note that it all traces back to a 1991 case, where Nitish was a co-accused but was later released. However an appeal regarding the main case is still pending with the High Court. Now because the appeal was pending, the litigator asserted that Kumar hid the information about the pending appeal in his affidavit. The EC has however dismissed the allegations, saying that, there was no such criminal case, when he filed affidavit for the Bihar Legislative Council. The Supreme Court stated that the PIL has no merit and is not based on facts and has hence dismissed it. All the attacks on Kumar, by the RJD and opposition parties too waned away with SC’s decision.