Even as the collector of Shivpuri gave a clean chit to Madhya Pradesh Sports Minister and BJP leader Yashodhara Raje Scindia for allegedly intimidating voters in Kolaras Assembly constituency where bypolls are due later this week, the Election Commission served her a show-cause notice over the issue.
Raje had allegedly said in a public meeting at Parora village on Saturday that if people voted for Congress, they would have to live without water and other other facilities.
She said “Paani tab ayyega jab aap panje ko vote nehi doge. Do baar aapne panje ko vote diya aur kitne baar aur doge aur paani ke bina rahoge (Water facilities will be installed when you do not vote for the hand symbol. You have voted for the hand twice and how many more times do you want to vote for the hand and live without water).”
Raje said that the people have already voted for the hand (Congress symbol) twice and seen the consequences.
“Neither drinking water schemes reached your villages nor your names figured in (the list of beneficiaries of) LPG stove distribution schemes,” she claimed. She further declared, “People would get benefits of government schemes only if a BJP MLA will represent the constituency. Even if the Congress candidate is elected, we will continue to be in the government. Ministers won’t even talk with him.”
Taking cognisance of a complaint filed by the Congress party quoting the speech, the Election Commission has served her a notice. The notice has been served for violation of the Model Code of Conduct and trying to influence voters before the bypoll.
Raje has been asked to file a reply to the Election Commission before Wednesday.
Earlier, state Congress spokesman J.P. Dhanopia made a written complaint to the state election office along with the video evidence of the speech.
Later the commission served a notice to Raje, saying, “The Commission considers that the statements made by you in your above referred speech, prima facie, amounts to undue influence within the meaning of Section 171C of IPC and Section 123(2) of the Representation of People Act, 1951, and amounts to violation of the provisions of the above quoted Para-1(4) of the Model Code of Conduct.”