Supreme Court Takes Note Of NCP Ajit Pawar Faction Member Posting Video Of Sharad Pawar, Asks To Issue Circular To Members To Refrain

The Supreme Court today asked the Ajit Pawar faction of the Nationalist Congress Party to gather details on a video posted by a sitting Legislative Council member containing a speech by Sharad Pawar and to issue a circular to the members of its faction not to use Sharad Pawar in any of its campaign material.

On November 12, Maharashtra Legislative Council member Amol Ramkrushna Mitkari posted a short video on his official X handle, part of which contains a speech by Sharad Pawar. The last shot of the video has the 'clock' symbol, which is sub judice but currently rests with the Ajit Pawar faction, and the accompanying text reads 'Rashtravadi Congress Party' in Hindi without specifying the faction or the Court-mandated disclaimer.

"Why does Ajit Pawar and this MLC have to carry my photo?" Senior Advocate Dr. Abhishek Manu Singhvi, appearing for the Sharad Pawar faction, said raising objections about the video. This led to Justice Surya Kant questioning whether voters in rural areas were concerned with what is posted on social media. Dr. Singhvi replied, "Today, India is different. Whatever we see here in Delhi, most of it is seen by rural people."

A two-Judge Bench of Justice Kant and Justice Ujjal Bhuyan asked the senior counsel appearing for the Ajit Pawar faction, "Find out who is this Amol Mitkari who is putting some video of Sharad Pawar. We are not saying anything (right now)." The Bench also asked the faction to issue a circular among the candidates and office bearers of the faction to refrain from using Sharad Pawar's photo or video in campaign materials.

"All your candidates, supporters and office bearers must ensure that no old or new photograph or video clip of Mister Sharad Pawar, with whom you now have ideological differences and are fighting against, is used. You should try to stand up on your own legs (based on) whatever support you have" Justice Kant said about the Ajit Pawar faction.

The Ajit Pawar and Sharad Pawar factions are in direct contest in 36 Legislative Assembly, which go to poll starting November 20. On this, Dr. Singhvi said, "For those 36 seats, the idea is to show 'Look you can help us also, we're close to (Sharad) Pawar'."

The Ajit Pawar faction had filed a compliance affidavit in accordance with the Court's November 6 Order to publish an "exclusive disclaimer" regarding the 'clock' symbol in "the prominent part of the newspapers", especially in Marathi language. Senior Advocate Balbir Singh, appearing for the Ajit Pawar faction, showed the Bench photos of the fresh advertisements issued in 11 newspapers, including Loksatta, The Indian Express, Dainik Bhaskar and The Times of India.

Balbir Singh stated that all campaign material was inspected and approved by the concerned Returning Officer. He claimed that the other side has produced "doctored documents" and photos and the real intent of the Sharad Pawar is to "seek one statement from the Court to prejudice the voters (against the Ajit Pawar faction)." To this, Justice Kant retorted, "We don't overestimate ourselves that we will influence the voters."

Dr. Singhvi rhetorically asked if the Ajit Pawar faction was saying it is not the Court's "higher duty as a Constitutional Court" to see a level playing field. "Why? Because if my lords speak in a Constitutional duty, the voters will get confused?"

The Sharad Pawar faction claimed that the Ajit Pawar faction had only shown compliance in some regions of Maharashtra, "elsewhere he repeats the same direct violation." Dr. Singhvi countered the argument on the Returning Officer having approved the campaign saying, "The Returning Officer does not check whether the disclaimer is there. He is not a policeman implementing (this Court's) Orders."

Dr. Singhvi argued that the object of the Court's Orders was being "thwarted" and for that reason "either the 'clock' should be frozen and he can be given anything under the sun, or (the Court) should take the most stringent action" for non-compliance with the direction on disclaimer. The Bench did not deal with this contention.

"The people of this country are very intelligent, very wise. They know where to vote and where not to vote. And we have no doubt about their wisdom in identifying who is for Ajit Pawar, who is for Sharad Pawar. The only thing is that sometimes video clips may or may not influence the voters. We cannot be sure. But if there is an Order by this Court, that should carefully respected and complied with." Justice Kant said.

Cause Title: Sharad Pawar v. Ajit Anantrao Pawar And Anr. [SLP(C) 4248/2024]