Delhi court dismisses
fake degree complaint against Smriti Irani, says it was filed to 'harrass' her
New Delhi: In a relief to Smriti Irani, a Delhi court on Tuesday dismissed
a complaint against her for allegedly giving false information on her
educational qualification to the Election Commission, saying it was filed to
"needlessly harass" her as she was a union minister.
Metropolitan
Magistrate Harvinder Singh said there was a "great delay of around 11
years" in filing the complaint as it rejected the plea to summon her as an
accused. "Therefore, prayer for summoning the proposed accused (Irani) is
hearby declined," the court said while pronouncing the order.
In
his complaint, freelance writer Ahmer Khan had alleged that Irani, now Textiles
Minister, had deliberately given discrepant information about her educational
qualifications in affidavits filed before the Election Commission in 2004, 2011
and 2014 and not given any clarification, despite concerns raised on the issue.
He had urged the court to take cognisance of the offences alleged in the plea
under Section 125A of the RPA and "summon the accused person, Smriti Z
Irani, for trial".
"After
conducting trial hold the accused guilty, convict and sentence the accused
person in accordance with law, in the interest of justice to the complainant
and also the public at large", he had prayed.
The
complainant had earlier claimed in court that in her affidavit for April 2004
Lok Sabha polls, Irani had said she completed her BA in 1996 from DU(School of
Correspondence), whereas in another affidavit of 11 July, 2011 to contest Rajya
Sabha election from Gujarat, she had said her highest educational qualification
was BCom Part I from the School of Correspondence, DU. In the affidavit filed
for nomination of 16 April, 2014 Lok Sabha polls from Amethi constituency in
Uttar Pradesh, Irani said she had completed Bachelor of Commerce Part-I from
School of Open Learning, DU. A poll panel official had earlier told the court
that the documents filed by Irani regarding her academic qualification while
filing nominations were not traceable. However, the information on this was
available on its website, he had said.
The
court, while declining the prayer, said the original evidence was already lost
due to passage of several years and the court needed to be "relieved of
the burden of adjudicating such inconsequential claim or case". It said
the fate of the case could be foreseen as inevitable failure as original
evidence was lost due to the "great delay" and the complainant may
not have even bothered to file the plea if Irani was not a central minister.
"So,
where the original evidence has already been lost due to passage of number of
years, the secondary evidence available will probably be not able to withstand
the test of judicial scrutiny, there is great great delay of around 11 years in
filing of the complaint...The said delay could not be condoned as complainant
is not an aggrieved person, the complaint does not appear to have been filed
for vindication of majesty of justice and maintenance of law and order, the
complaint appears to have been filed to needlessly harass the proposed
accused," the magistrate said.
Section
125A of RPA deals with penalty for filing false affidavit and entails a jail
term of up to six months or fine or both. The court said the alleged offence
under the IPC entailed a maximum punishment of three years for which the
limitation for filing the complaint was three years under the CrPC.
The
court had on 20 November last year allowed the complainant's plea seeking
direction to the officials of EC and DU to bring the records of Irani's
qualifications after he said he was unable to place them before the court. In
pursuance to the court's earlier direction, Delhi University had also submitted
that the documents pertaining to Irani's BA course in 1996, as purportedly
mentioned by her in an affidavit filed during 2004 Lok Sabha elections, were
yet to be found.
Khan
had alleged that Irani had knowingly furnished misleading information about her
qualifications and that a candidate, deliberately giving incorrect details,
could be punished under provisions of the IPC and under section 125A of the
Representation of the People Act (RPA).