Pappu Yadav cannot stand for re-election

Pappu can't become MP
2 Apr 2009, 1517 hrs IST, Ravi Dayal, TNN

PATNA: Close on the heels of the Supreme Court declining to stay the conviction of cine actor Sanjay Dutt to enable him to contest parliamentary polls from Lucknow, the Patna High Court on Thursday rejected RJD MP Pappu Yadav's plea for a similar reprieve in CPM MLA Ajit Sarkar murder case in which he has been awarded life term by the trial court.

A division bench comprising Justice Shivakirti Singh and Justice Dharnidhar Jha rejected Yadav's plea made in an interlocutory petition filed with his criminal appeal against the conviction.

The sitting Madhepura MP wanted to re-contest the parliamentary poll. Unlike Dutt whose candidature had been announced by the Samajwadi Party, Pappu's candidature had not announced by the RJD.

The Patna HC had last week also rejected a similar interlocutory petition of RJD's Siwan MP Mohd Shahabuddin who has been sentenced to life imprisonment in a case of kidnap-cum-murder by the trial court.

The HC had earlier admitted for hearing the criminal appeals of Pappu and Shahabuddin against their conviction. However, the state government opposed their interlocutory petitions.

Shahabuddin's wife Heena Shahab, hitherto known as a housewife, has since filed her nomination papers from Siwan as an RJD candidate. Pappu's wife Ranjeeta Ranjan, sitting LJP MP from Saharsa, is seeking re-election from Supaul as Saharsa has ceased to exist as a parliamentary constituency after delimitation.

Another convicted MP Surajbhan Singh, also awarded life term in a case of murder, has managed to get his party LJP's ticket for wife Veena Devi from Nawada

Pappu Yadav is the 4th MP who was trying to stand for re-election inspite of having been convicted.
I would once again like to thank the judiciary for having taken appropriate action.
I would further request them to make the legal system so fool-proof that these MP's who have been convicted of such heinous crimes do not get bail when they appeal to higher courts.
They should be kept under lock up until their conviction is set aside by a higher court, if it is set aside.
The judiciary is to take a more active part if it is to bring back the rule of law.

Radheshyam