Noting that the Returning Officer defaced the ballot papers in the Chandigarh mayoral polls, the Supreme Court on Monday termed it as “murder of democracy”.

Coming down heavily on the Returning Officer, a Bench led by CJI DY Chandrachud said, “It’s obvious that he defaced the ballot papers. Is this the way he conducts the elections? This is a mockery of democracy. This is a murder of democracy. This man should be prosecuted.”

The top court ordered that the entire record of the mayoral election should be kept separately and safely with the Registrar General of the Punjab and Haryana High Court.

Issuing notice on AAP councillor Kuldeep Kumar’s petition challenging the results and seeking fresh election, it ordered that the ballots and videography should be preserved.

It directed the Chandigarh Deputy Commissioner to hand over all relevant records to the High Court Registrar General by 5 pm on Monday itself. The Bench also stayed the ensuing meeting of the Chandigarh Municipal Corporation scheduled for February 7.

After watching the video, the CJI said the Bench was “appalled” to see the Presiding Officer’s conduct. “Why is he looking at the camera and running like a fugitive?” the CJI wondered.

BJP candidate Manoj Sonkar had bagged 16 votes against the 12 received by the Congress-AAP candidate Kuldeep Kumar after eight votes were rejected.

The political fight between the AAP and the BJP over Chandigarh mayoral polls had reached the Supreme Court on Thursday with Kumar challenging the high court’s order refusing to stay the election results.

A Division Bench of Justice Sudhir Singh and Justice Harsh Bunger of the Punjab and Haryana High Court had on Wednesday denied relief to AAP, which had demanded fresh polls under the supervision of a retired high court judge, alleging tampering with ballot papers.

The high court had, however, issued a notice to the Chandigarh Administration and asked it to respond to Kumar’s petition in three weeks.

Kumar alleged that in complete departure from the practice and rules, the presiding officer refused to allow nominees of parties to monitor the counting of votes. Kumar urged the top court to set aside the election result, alleging it was “a result of complete fraud and forgery laid upon the democratic process”.