Once again, an academic question:
Do we feel that the spirit of the law was followed when Mulayam Singh Yadhav's vote was held to be invalid. After all, it was NOT yet cast, was it?
If a person - while still under oath, can revise his earlier testimony, why is a Voter not able to revise his voting preference before the vote is cast?
If the law is as it is, do we believe that it is reasonable?
It was definitely not reasonable by any standards .
Our Network Sites
