Writ Petition (Civil) No. 121 of 2008. Case: Resurgence India Vs Election Commission of India & Anr.. Supreme Court (India)
| Case Number | Writ Petition (Civil) No. 121 of 2008 |
| Judges | P. Sathasivam, C.J.I. |
| Issue | Representation of the People Act, 1951 - Sections 125A, 33A, 36, 125A |
| Judgement Date | September 13, 2013 |
| Court | Supreme Court (India) |
Judgment:
P. Sathasivam, C.J.I.
1) This writ petition, under Article 32 of the Constitution of India, has been filed to issue specific directions to effectuate meaningful implementation of the judgments rendered by this Court in Union of India vs. Association for Democratic Reforms and Another (2002) 5 SCC 294 and People''s Union for Civil Liberties (PUCL) and Another vs. Union of India & Anr. (2003) 4 SCC 399 and also to direct the respondents herein to make it compulsory for the Returning Officers to ensure that the affidavits filed by the contestants are complete in all respects and to reject the affidavits having blank particulars.
Background:
2) In order to maintain purity of elections and to bring transparency in the process of election, this Court, in Association for Democratic Reforms (supra), directed the Election Commission of India-Respondent No. 1 herein to issue necessary orders, in exercise of its power under Article 324 of the Constitution, to call for information on affidavit from each candidate seeking election to the Parliament or a State Legislature as a necessary part of his nomination paper furnishing therein information relating to his conviction/acquittal/discharge in any criminal offence in the past, any case pending against him of any offence punishable with imprisonment for 2 years or more, information regarding assets (movable, immovable, bank balance etc.) of the candidate as well as of his/her spouse and that of dependants, liability, if any, and the educational qualification of the candidate.
3) Pursuant to the above order, the Election Commission, vide order dated 28.06.2002, issued certain directions to the candidates to furnish full and complete information in the form of an affidavit, duly sworn before a Magistrate of the First Class, with regard to the matters specified in Association for Democratic Reforms (supra). It was also directed that non-furnishing of the affidavit by any candidate or furnishing of any wrong or incomplete information or suppression of any material information will result in the rejection of the nomination paper, apart from inviting penal consequences under the Indian Penal Code, 1860. It was further clarified that only such information shall be considered to be wrong or incomplete or suppression of material information which is found to be a defect of substantial character by the Returning Officer in the summary inquiry conducted by him at the time of scrutiny of nomination papers.
4) In People''s Union for Civil Liberties (PUCL) (supra), though this Court reaffirmed the aforementioned decision but also held that the direction to reject the nomination papers for furnishing wrong information or concealing material information and verification of assets and liabilities by means of a summary inquiry at the time of scrutiny of the nominations cannot be justified.
5) Pursuant to the above, the Election Commission, vide order dated 27.03.2003, held its earlier order dated 28.06.2002 non-enforceable with regard to verification of assets and liabilities by means of summary inquiry and rejection of nomination papers on the ground of furnishing wrong information or suppression of material information.
6) Again, the Election Commission of India, vide letter dated 02.06.2004 directed the Chief Electoral Officers of all the States and Union Territories that where any complaint regarding furnishing of false information by any candidate is submitted by anyone, supported by some documentary evidence, the Returning Officer concerned should initiate action to prosecute the candidate concerned by filing formal complaint before the appropriate authority.
Brief facts:
7) In the above backdrop, the brief facts of the case in hand are as under:- Resurgence India-the petitioner herein is a non-governmental organization (NGO) registered under the Societies Registration Act, 1860 and is working for social awakening, social empowerment, human rights and dignity. During Punjab Legislative Assembly Elections, 2007, the petitioner-organization undertook a massive exercise under the banner "Punjab Election Watch'' and affidavits pertaining to the candidates of six major political parties in the State were analyzed in order to verify their completeness. During such campaign, large scale irregularities were found in most of the affidavits filed by the candidates.
8) On 09.02.2007, the petitioner-organization made a representation to the Election Commission of India regarding large number of non-disclosures in the affidavits filed by the contestants in the State of Punjab and poor level of scrutiny by the Returning Officers. Vide letter dated 20.02.2007, the Election Commission of India expressed its inability in rejecting the nomination papers of the candidates solely due to furnishing of false/incomplete information in the affidavits in view of the judgment in People''s Union for Civil Liberties (PUCL) (supra).
9) Being aggrieved of the same, the petitioner-organization has preferred this petition for the issuance of a writ of mandamus to make it compulsory for the Returning Officers to ensure that the affidavits filed by the contestants should be complete in all respects and to reject those nomination papers which are accompanied by incomplete/blank affidavits. The petitioner-organization also prayed for deterrent action against the Returning Officers in case of acceptance of such incomplete affidavits in order to remove deficiencies in the format of the prescribed affidavit.
10) Heard Mr. Prashant Bhushan, learned counsel for the petitioner-organization, Ms. Meenakshi Arora, learned counsel for the Election Commission of India-Respondent No. 1 herein and Mr. A. Mariarputham, learned senior counsel for the Union of India. Prayer/Relief Sought for:
Stand of the Petitioner-Organization:
11) The Petitioner-organization pleaded for issuance of appropriate writ/direction including the writ of mandamus directing the respondents herein to make it compulsory for the Returning Officers to ensure that the affidavits filed by the candidates are complete in all respects and to reject those nomination papers, which are accompanied by blank affidavits.
Stand of the Election Commission of India:
It is the stand of the Election Commission of India that the judgment in People''s Union for Civil Liberties (PUCL) (supra) does not empower the Returning Officers to reject the nomination papers solely due to furnishing of false/incomplete/blank information in the affidavits signed by the candidates. In succinct, they put forth the argument that they do not have any latitude for rejecting the nomination papers in view of the above mentioned judgment. However, learned...
To continue reading
Request your trial