Malegaon blast accused Ramesh Upadhyay gets nod to contest UP election, Hindu Mahasabha yet to decide on fielding him
Upadhyay's son Vishal says that he is right now in talks with the Akhil Bharat Hindu Mahasabha to field his father again from Bairia. The party is yet to take a call on him.
Malegaon blast accused Ramesh Upadhyay has got permission to contest UP election from the special MCOCA court hearing the case.
Upadhyay had moved the election application last week and both the jail authorities and the NIA said that they had no objection to Upadhyay's standing in the election.
Upadhyay had contested the 2012 election on the Akhil Bharat Hindu Mahasabha ticket from his hometown Bairia in Balia but lost. This time though, the Hindu Mahasabha has not yet come forward to give any ticket. Upadhyay's son Vishal says that he is right now in talks with the party to field his father again from the same constituency. "I am also going to go to Mumbai next week to consult my father whether we should speak to the BJP as well or go ahead as an independent candidate", said Vishal, a law student studying in Pune with his mother.
- Upadhyay is a native of the Dalan Chapra village in Bairia constituency in Ballia. His brothers and relatives still live there.
- Although the Hindu Mahasabha wants Upadhyay to contest from two seats, Upadhyay himself wants to contest election from Bairia as he knows the demographic constitution of the constituency and its problems, even though he had last been there only about 14-15 years ago.
- Meanwhile, Upadhyay, with the granting of the election application, has now moved another application, asking for a provisional bail between February 4 and March 4.
- During that time he will travel across his constituency and meet his voters. This despite the fact that the investigating agency is yet to reply to Upadhyay's latest application.
- The NIA had last year filed a supplementary chargesheet, saying that the stringent MCOCA law was not applicable in the case.
- Upadhyay has also last October challenged the applicability of Unlawful Activities Prevention Act (UAPA) in the case, saying that the procedure of sanction of UAPA was not followed in the same.