BJP today said they have filed a complaint against AAP with the Election Commission for seeking vote in its manifesto on religous grounds.
"We have registered the problems they (Muslims) have been facing in our manifesto, it does not constitute incitement of communal feelings under the Model Code of Conduct.
"...If you go through BJP's national manifesto of 2009 general elections, which said that what party aims to do for Muslims. We would request BJP people to read their manifesto carefully," said AAP leader Yogendra Yadav.
"First locals from South Delhi had objected, then BJP had objected on the issue and calling them a 'communal party' and now today this is third complaint," he said.
Yadav said making appeal on communal grounds was against MCC and also banned in Representation of People's Act but not registering problems of a community.
"Registering problems -- social, political and economic -- was not only improtant but necessary for democracy. We have Commissions for Scheduled Caste, Scheduled Tribe and Minority Commission, these are all constitutional body and formed by any government.
"Trying to instill fear on in a particular community on religious grounds, or sending message that the country was for a particular community, then these constitute communal feeling," he added.
Yadav praised Association for Democratic Reforms (ADR) for releasing the database of candidates contesting December 4 polls about their assets, criminal cases and others.
He expressed surprise over three-fold increase in the income of sitting MLAs, and said Election Commission should not ask for candidate's affidavits but also scrutinies their income and their sources.
"There is no case of personal criminal activity against any of our candidates," he said, adding even BJP's Chief Ministerial candidate Harsh Vardhan had a case related to crime against women.
Yadav, while expressing sympathy with its candidate from Rajouri Garden Assembly seat, who concealed facts about the FIR against him, said "party doesn't hold him guilty, but since he had failed to inform the party about the case so party had to take harsh decision."
