[dropcap]A[/dropcap] team of advocates has released a model election petition to enable any voter in a Lok Sabha constituency to challenge before a high court, the election of a candidate with criminal antecedents who did not advertise their criminal past in a leading newspaper and local television channel as per directions of the Supreme Court.
A Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court in its judgment dated September 25, 2018 in Writ Petition (Civil) No.536 of 2011had directed candidates with criminal antecedents and the political parties fielding them to issue a public advertisement in a leading local newspaper and television channel on three different dates between the filing of the nomination and date of election publicising all relevant details of the candidate’s past to enable voters make an informed choice.
Modified nomination forms
To implement the direction, the Central Government even modified the nomination form by inserting a new row and fields in the Conduct of Elections (Amendment) Rules, 2018 and the Election Commission of India notified new forms for candidates and their political parties to insert such an advertisement in the media.
At a press conference held in Bangalore recently, the team of advocates, led by K V Dhananjay, released the comprehensive draft election petition which they said would be available in the public domain for use by lawyers and voters for free. Dhananjay urged lawyers “to freely represent voters who wish to file election petition to the High Court against victorious candidates who have breached the recent direction by the Supreme Court – both in Karnataka and across India”.
Contravention of Supreme Court directions
With more than 40% of recently elected representatives to the Lok Sabha carrying a criminal past, the advocates alleged that the candidates and their political parties had knowingly contravened the direction of the Supreme Court in the recently concluded Lok Sabha election.
“We are a coalition of advocates who have come together to fight the biggest threat to public health – tobacco – in public interest. We do not receive money or fees for our work. We were greatly disappointed with the electoral discourse during the just concluded election to the Lok Sabha,” Dhananjay said on behalf of the group.
“Our legal team is committed to help voters across the country and their lawyers who wish to fight increasing criminalization of our Parliament,” he said.
Under the law, such a petition must be filed within 45 days from the declaration of the result and the high court is bound to conduct a day to day trial and adjudicate the matter within six months.
Section 100(1)(d)(iv) of the Representation of People Act, 1951
Dhananjay pointed out that under Section 100(1)(d)(iv) of the Representation of People Act, 1951 the election of a candidate who violates, breaches or does not conform to the provisions of the Constitution, Representation of People Act, 1951 or the Rules or Orders made therein, could be set aside by a high court if the violation is such as to materially affect the votes cast in that election.
The courts have consistently held that provisions of the Representation of People Act, 1951 are to be read or even, limited by express directions issued by the Supreme Court. Hence, candidates who have defied the recent direction of the Supreme Court will attract Section 100(1)(d)(iv) of the Representation of People Act, 1951 and their election is bound to be set aside as the successful candidate has taken advantage of the ill-informed voters, Dhananjay said.
[pdfviewer]https://cdn.theleaflet.in/wp-content/uploads/2019/06/09135308/Election-Petition-Final.pdf[/pdfviewer]
