The Supreme Court on Wednesday issued a directive to the Ajit Pawar-led faction of the Nationalist Congress Party (NCP), advising them to stand independently and refrain from using images or videos of Sharad Pawar in their electoral campaign. The bench, comprising Justices Surya Kant and Ujjal Bhuyan, emphasized the need for the faction to establish its own identity due to ideological differences with Sharad Pawar.
During the proceedings, the court responded to complaints from the Sharad Pawar group, represented by senior advocate Abhishek Singhvi, about the misuse of Sharad Pawar’s image by the Ajit Pawar faction. An MLC from the Ajit Pawar faction had reportedly circulated a video clip showcasing Sharad Pawar to imply endorsement, which the bench found misleading.
Justice Kant and Bhuyan highlighted the intelligence of the Indian electorate, noting that voters are capable of distinguishing between the two factions, despite potential confusion caused by the misuse of digital media. The bench stressed that any such confusion should be avoided to maintain the integrity of the electoral process.
The court ordered the Ajit Pawar faction to circulate an online circular among its leaders and party workers, explicitly instructing them not to use Sharad Pawar’s picture or any video/audio clips in the campaign. This directive aligns with previous Supreme Court orders restraining the Ajit Pawar faction from using symbols or images associated with the Sharad Pawar faction.
Polling for the Maharashtra assembly elections is scheduled for November 20, with vote counting set for November 23. The court has listed the matter for further hearing next Tuesday, continuing to address the ongoing legal disputes between the two factions of the NCP.
This legal tussle began when the Election Commission recognized the Ajit Pawar faction as the legitimate NCP earlier this year, a decision currently under challenge by Sharad Pawar. The Supreme Court has also directed the Ajit Pawar-led faction to use the ‘clock’ election symbol with a disclaimer stating that the issue is subjudice.
