Controversies surrounding an IT professional allegedly confronting the husband of a sitting BJP councillor, asking him to return Rs 25 lakh he had paid to get a civic body agenda approved, and a viral audio clip allegedly involving the husband of another BJP councillor reportedly about an illegal transaction of Rs 80 lakh during the mayoral elections resurfaced on the floor of the General House of the Municipal Corporation after an Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) raised the matter.AAP leaders said they also submitted a complaint in this connection to Chandigarh Director General of Police (DGP) Dr Sagar Preet Hooda, and sought registration of an FIR and a probe by an SIT or an independent investigating agency. Rs 25-lakh episodeAccording to the AAP’s complaint, the first incident took place outside a commercial establishment at Sector 40 this month, where an IT professional allegedly confronted the husband of a sitting BJP councillor, demanding Rs 25 lakh he claimed to have paid to get a civic body agenda approved.In the complaint, the AAP said during the confrontation, the councillor’s husband “admitted to receiving money and referred to Rs 5 lakh as his personal share”.The AAP alleged that the payment was made to get a civic body agenda processed, and sought an investigation into the alleged commission arrangement.Audio clip of Rs 80LThe second controversy erupted from an audio clip that went viral.According to the AAP complaint, the audio clip features a conversation reportedly involving the husband of another BJP councillor, in which an alleged monetary deal of Rs 80 lakh linked to the mayoral election was discussed.Story continues below this adThe AAP said, “The conversation includes an alleged admission: although the entire Rs 80 lakh may not have been received, a substantial amount was given, but it was less than Rs 80 lakh.”In its complaint to the DGP, the AAP demanded a forensic examination of the original audio, including voice-sample verification, to establish its authenticity and identify the persons involved.In its complaint, the AAP has sought an FIR against those named in the complaint, and others accused involved in the transactions.The party also sought preservation and seizure of evidence, including CCTV footage from Sector 40, call-detail records, cell-tower data and the original audio recording, besides forensic examination of the audio.Story continues below this adIn the HouseThe two controversies caught both BJP councillors off guard after AAP councillor Yogesh Dhingra alleged that five BJP councillors received Rs 5 lakh each in connection with the mayoral election.When Mayor Saurabh Joshi on Tuesday asked Dhingra to name the five councillors and produce evidence against them in the House, Dhingra referred to the complaint submitted to the DGP and said the allegations and evidence should be investigated.BJP councillors, however, objected to the charges levelled by Dhingra and sought action against him.The confrontation eventually led to a censure motion against him and his suspension from the remaining proceedings of the House.Story continues below this adCouncillors’ husbandsOne of the BJP councillor’s husbands, allegedly involved in the Rs 25-lakh controversy, told The Indian Express, “I have also given a complaint today. Some news is doing the rounds, and they named me, even as I was not there at the time of the incident. It is a politically motivated move.”Another BJP councillor’s husband, allegedly involved in the Rs 80-lakh audio controversy, said, “The person speaking with me is into selling weapons. I am very fond of weapons, so we were discussing a high-end weapon. The conversation had nothing to do with the mayoral election. Since he stays in the same sector, I was rather asking him about what happened in his ward (about the previous confrontation). I also discussed the price of weapons, and then he jokingly said, ‘You have given Rs 80 lakh in the mayoral election.’ In a light-hearted manner, I replied, too: ‘It was less.’ It was clearly said in jest and had no connection with any actual payment or election dealing.”Legal courseTalking about a legal option in such matters, a senior lawyer of the Punjab and Haryana High Court said, “In such cases, the first requirement is a formal complaint. In allegations such as the Rs 80 lakh deal mentioned in the audio, a petition can also be filed before the appropriate election authority/court. In the case of a UT election, it is the Punjab and Haryana High Court, if the complainant has evidence to show that the election was won through unfair means. If such evidence is placed before the court, it can direct a forensic examination of the audio or other material. The police, however, can take action only if the allegations disclose a cognisable offence.”