Court rejects plaint against AAP MLA

NEW DELHI: A trial court has rejected a corruption complaint seeking action against AAP MLA Akhilesh Pati Tripathi for allegedly spending over the prescribed limit of Rs 14 lakh in the 2013 election campaign. The court said that though it had, prima facie, found that Tripathi had breached the cap for poll expenses during 2013 assembly election, he cannot be charged under Prevention of Corruption (PC) Act as he was not a public servant at that time.
"...prima facie it appears that respondent 1 (Tripathi) incurred more election expense than prescribed limit. However, in my opinion the same was incurred when he was only a contesting candidate for the post of MLA and was not a public servant," special judge Hemani Malhotra said.
However, the court said action against a candidate's misconduct lies under the Representation of the People Act, 1950 which may result in disqualification of an elected candidate. The court referred to a SC verdict in which it had said under the election rules if an account is found to be incorrect or untrue by the Election Commission after enquiry, it may disqualify the said person. TNN
While rejecting the complaint, the court said, "The act/conduct of Tripathi by submitting accounts after he became an MLA to explain the expenditure incurred by him before he was elected as MLA is not an offence committed under the Prevention of Corruption (PC) Act as when the election expenses were incurred, he was not a public servant."
The court was hearing a complaint filed by lawyer Vivek Garg who had also sought FIR against some officials of ECI, Delhi Chief Electoral Office (CEO) and some officials of the Delhi government, for allegedly colluding with Tripathi to manipulate the account of expenditure incurred by him. The court, while dismissing the plea, also noted that a sanction to prosecute the officials of ECI, CEO and Delhi government was missing and referred to a SC judgement saying the court cannot take notice of private complaint against a public servant without a sanction order.
The complaint had alleged that the maximum expenditure limit for Delhi Assembly Election 2013 was Rs 14 lakh whereas the MLA understated the statement of expenditure by Rs 8.93 lakh. "The alleged offence was committed to win the election by manipulating the records of election expenditure," it claimed adding that the public servants allegedly saved Tripathi by conniving with him and stating that the expense incurred by him in the campaign was within prescribed limit.
Garg claimed that he had approached Special Commissioner, Crime Branch for registration of FIR against Tripathi, but to no avail. He had also told the court that he approached various other forums too for seeking action against Trpathi and others but no action was taken. Garg had sought registration of FIR against Tripathi and some unnamed ECI, CEO and Delhi govt officials for offences under sections 477A (falsification of accounts), 420 (cheating), 409 (criminal breach of trust by public servant), 171-H (illegal payment in connection with election), 171-I (failure to keep election account) and 120B(criminal conspiracy) of the IPC and various provisions of Prevention of Corruption (PC) Act, 1988.