The Rajasthan High Court has dismissed a PIL seeking directions to all political parties and candidates who contest elections not to use caste and religion for the purposes of election and to restrain them from visiting religious places such as Temples, Mosques, Church, Ashram, Math and other places of worship during the election campaign, after the notification is issued regarding polls.
The PIL has been filed by one Sant Vaidehi Balabh Dev Acharyaji Maharaj.
The Division Bench of Chief Justice Pankaj Mittal and Justice Sandeep Mehta observed that the petitioner in this connection had previously filed Petition [Sant Vaidehi Balabh Dev Acharyaji Maharaj Vs. State of Rajasthan and Ors.].
In the said petition also, the petitioner has sought general directions to the same effect that all political parties and the candidates who contest the election can only use their names and identity according to the registration in the Electoral Roll or the nomination form but the surname and the caste of the candidates should not be published during the election campaign and the candidates and leaders of the political parties may be restrained from visiting the religious places during election campaign.
The said petition was dismissed by the Court in limine vide judgment and order dated 23.10.2018 observing that seeking vote in the name of religion, caste, community, language etc. is statutorily prohibited and, therefore, no general directions in this regard are required.
However, it was left open for the aggrieved persons that if any grievance exists in this regard, it may be appropriately dealt with by the Election Commission in accordance with law , the Bench noted.
The petitioner in pursuance of the above order is said to have submitted some representation to the Election Commission but with no result.
“In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances, it is crystal clear that the present writ petition is nothing but virtual repetition of the earlier writ petition and the reliefs claimed are virtually the same”, held the Bench.
It is settled law that successive writ petitions for the same cause of action are not maintainable and that filing of second petition for the same purpose is an abuse of the process of law.
In view of the above, the High Court was not inclined to exercise its discretionary jurisdiction in the petition and dismissed the petition with the directions to the Chief Election Commissioner of India to objectively consider and pass appropriate order on the representation of the petitioner, if any, made in this connection earlier.