The Supreme Court on Monday directed the Union of India and the Election Commission of India (ECI) to file their response within three weeks on a petition seeking a permanent ban on those convicted of criminal offences from contesting elections to the Parliament and State Assemblies.
The Bench of Justice Dipankar Datta and Justice Manmohan further sought the assistance of Attorney General R Venkataramani on the interim application filed by lawyer and activist Ashwini Kumar Upadhyay in 2017, challenging the validity of Sections 8 and 9 of the Representation of People’s Act, 1951, in certain respects.
The petitioner particularly challenged the constitutional validity of Sections 8 and 9 of the 1951 Act, insofar as they disqualified persons convicted of criminal offences from serving as Members of Parliament (MPs) or as Members of Legislative Assemblies (MLAs) only for a certain period.
While seeking assistance of AG Venkataramani, the Bench observed that the state governments wishing to make their submissions on the issue would be allowed to do so.
The Apex Court further said that it would hear all stakeholders in the matter, provided they made responses in a timely manner.
Section 8 of the RP Act disqualifies those convicted of certain listed offences from contesting elections from the date of their conviction and for a period of six years from the date of their release from prison.
Section 9 of the RP Act similarly disqualifies those dismissed from government service for corruption or disloyalty to the State, for a period of five years after the date of dismissal.
The petitioner contended that it was unconstitutional to ban such persons from elected posts only for a limited period of time.
The IA was filed by Upadhyay as part of his public interest litigation (PIL) against the criminalisation of politics. Among other prayers, the petition sought expeditious disposal of criminal trials pending against MPs and MLAs.
A three-judge Bench of the Apex Court, headed by then Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud, had passed a comprehensive ruling in 2023 on the aspect of speedy trial against the MPs and MLAs.
The Division Bench today took note of concerns that the progress of trial against legislatures remained slow, however, it opined that it would be inappropriate to reconsider an issue that has been examined earlier by a larger Bench of three judges.
This aspect was referred to CJI Sanjiv Khanna for the constitution of an appropriate Bench that may examine the same.
The Division Bench, however, would be considering the matter related to the validity of Sections 8 and 9 of the RP Act.
The top court of the country allowed certain amendments to the original IA filed in 2017.
Senior Advocate Vikas Singh appeared for Ashwini Kumar Upadhyay today.
Making his submissions, Amicus Curiae Vijay Hansaria today questioned whether it was right for the recognised national political parties, entitled to reserved election symbols, to have convicted criminals as their office bearers.
The Amicus submitted that this issue also needed consideration by the Court, apart from the validity of Sections 8 and 9 of the 1951 Act, as well as expeditious disposal of MP/MLA cases.
He further contended that as per the current law, a person may commit murder, but he could also be the chairman of a nationally recognised political party. This issue should also be considered by the Court, he added.
Appearing for the Election Commission of India (ECI), Advocate Sidhant Kumar sought the Court’s leave to file a response to the amended IA concerning the challenge to Sections 8 and 9 of the RP Act.
Noting that criminalisation of politics was a major issue, the Bench observed that the Election Commission must have applied its mind and come out with a better solution than being canvassed before the Court.
While allowing the Election Commission’s appeal, the Bench hinted at passing a comprehensive order on the issue. It then listed the matter for further hearing on March 4.
During the course of hearing, the top court of the country noted that the petitioner’s objective aimed at decriminalisation of politics needed to be achieved as a country. However, it should not do a half-baked exercise, otherwise, people might think they were being taken for a ride.