The Supreme Court on Friday dismissed a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) seeking directions to bar namesake or duplicate candidates who deliberately contest elections as independent candidates in an effort to ruin the chances of other candidates.
The plea sought directions to the Election Commission of India (ECI) to scrutinise the background of namesake candidates and avert them from contesting if they have been deliberately fielded by the opponents. The plea was mentioned before a three-judge bench of Justice B.R Gavai, Satish Chandra Sharma, and Sandeep Mehta.
When the matter was called for hearing, Justice Gavai remarked that the petitioner knows the fate of the case. He asked that if someone’s parents have given a similar name, can it come in the way of contesting elections? If somebody is born as Rahul Gandhi or if somebody is born as Lalu Prasad Yadav, how will they be prevented from contesting elections and wouldn’t it affect their rights?, he continued.
Nonetheless, the counsel for the petitioner tried convincing the bench by arguing that he had tested this issue after going through the two reports of the Election Commission. Relying upon Rule 22(3) of the Conduct of Elections Rules 1961 that states if two or more candidates bear the same name, they shall be distinguished by the addition of their occupation or residence or in some other manner. According to Rule 30(3) if two or more candidates bear the same name, they shall be distinguished by the addition of their occupation or residence or in some other manner.
Meanwhile, since the bench was not convinced to entertain the petition, the advocate requested to withdraw the petition. The top court allowed the same, and thus, it was dismissed as withdrawn.
The plea lodged by Sabu Steephen, through Advocate V K Biju, proposed to have a mechanism in order to assess the background of namesake candidates and their campaigns after they file their nominations.