Soren got 48 votes, while the BJP walked out during the House proceedings.
Earlier in the day, Chief Minister Hemant Soren tabled a confidence motion in the Jharkhand Assembly. He claimed that the BJP was attempting to poach UPA MLAs, which prompted him to take the step.
The Chief Minister lambasted the BJP for creating uncertainty in the state.
Speaking on the motion, Soren said, “BJP wants to create division in the state and instil fear but till the UPA government is in place the BJP’s plan will not succeed.”
A majority of the UPA MLAs were sent to Raipur and arrived in Ranchi on Sunday evening amid a threat of poaching.
Soren’s government is running with the support of Congress and the Rashtriya Janata Dal.
Political analysts believe that even as Soren survived the trust vote, an uncertain situation still prevails around his chances of contesting election in the coming times.
On August 26, the Jharkhand Governor had decided to cancel the Assembly membership of Soren on which the Election Commission (EC) is expected to issue a notification soon.
The development has given rise to speculation that Soren might tender his resignation from the post of Chief Minister soon.
Soren has found himself in the midst of a crisis after the BJP complained to Governor Ramesh Bais about a stone quarry that he had taken on lease on his name even as he was holding the office of Chief Minister.
The BJP had termed it “a case of violation of the Office of Profit and Representation of the People Act”.
Following this, the Governor had sought the EC’s opinion on the matter.
The EC had then issued a notice to the complainant as well as Chief Minister Soren, seeking their response on the matter.
After hearing both sides, the EC eventually recommended the Raj Bhavan to cancel Soren’s Assembly membership.
Experts believe that calling a special Assembly session to prove majority was a part of Soren’s strategy to form a shield around him.
After the cancellation of his Assembly membership, analysts say two scenarios could be possible — even after losing the membership he may still be able to contest elections; or (secondly), he may be debarred from contesting polls for a while.
In the second scenario, someone else may have to be pitched in for leading the government.
The third possibility is, the governor may impose President’s Rule. However, the probability of this happening looks “remote” as of now.
–IANS
Comments are closed.