Tuesday , October 11 2016
Home / News / Politics / HC dismisses petition of BSP leader against Mulayam over

HC dismisses petition of BSP leader against Mulayam over


The Allahabad High Court today dismissed a petition challenging the stay on summons issued against Samajwadi Party supremo Mulayam Singh Yadav by a court in Mahoba district of Uttar Pradesh for his alleged comment on cases of gang-rape.

Justice Suneet Kumar dismissed the petition of Dhooram Chaudhary – a BSP leader from Mahoba – and also slapped on him a cost of Rs one lakh concurring with the state government’s contention that the petitioner had approached the court with “ulterior motive”.

The petitioner had filed an application under Article 227 of the Constitution which lays down that every High Court shall have superintendence over all courts and tribunals throughout the territories in relation to which it exercises jurisdiction.

The petitioner had prayed for quashing of an order passed by the sessions court of Mahoba on August 22, 2015 whereby it had stayed the summons issued a day earlier by a judicial magistrate who had initiated proceedings against Mulayam Singh Yadav taking suo motu cognizance of news reports which quoted the SP supremo as having said “ek aurat se char log rape nahin kar sakte” (four men cannot rape a woman).

The judicial magistrate had summoned Yadav, who is the father of Chief Minister Akhilesh Yadav, under various sections of IPC as well as Indecent Representation of Women (Prohibition) Act.

The counsel for the respondents, led by Advocate General Veer Bahadur Singh, contended that the petitioner was not an aggrieved party and had filed the petition with the “ulterior motive” to “malign the image of a senior political leader”.

The summons was passed against Mulayam Singh Yadav by judicial magistrate and civil judge of Kulpahar (in Mahoba) Ankit Goel who had recently drawn flak from the High Court for having initiated suo motu proceedings on sedition charges against Union Finance Minister Arun Jaitley following news reports of his criticism of the Supreme Court order on National Judicial Appointments Commission Act.

The court had, while allowing Jaitley’s application vide order dated November 5, 2015, observed that the magistrate “acted irresponsibly and failed to bear in mind the caution and circumspection which should have preceded his assuming jurisdiction and issuing summons”.

Read Also


Akhilesh Govt. not serious in resolving UP’s electricity crisis: Piyush Goyal