HC against jailbirds in fray
In a significant judgement, the Patna High Court has asked the EC to consider countermanding polls where prisoners are in the fray.
In a landmark judgment that could impact the polls in several states, Patna High Court today ruled that people “de-enfranchised by law” cannot contest the Lok Sabha elections.
The court directed the commission to consider countermanding the polls in constituencies where the contestants include people in jail or people whose voting rights have been suspended under election laws.
The verdict will affect six politicians: RJD strongman Mohammed Shahabuddin (Siwan); LJP leader Rajesh Ranjan alias Pappu Yadav (Purnia); Independent MLA Rajan Tiwary (Motihari); Ranvir Sena chief Brahmeshwar Singh (Ara), Suman Kumar Singh alias Ranjit ‘Don’ (Begusarai) — the prime accused in CAT paper leak scam — and Independent candidate Babloo Srivastava (Sitapur, UP).
The order was passed by the Division Bench of Chief Justice Ravi S. Dhavan and Justice Shashank Kumar Singh on two PILs — filed by NGO Jan Chaukidar and JD (U) nominee for Siwan Om Prakash Yadav — seeking disqualification of those contesting the poll from behind bars.
“The elections in which they have participated have been desecrated. Parliamentary democracy, with such persons participating in it, is endangered. The EC should act, and act with speed before declaration of results. Otherwise, in this state, the territorial jurisdiction within the purview of this high court, illegalities will have been committed,” the Bench observed.
About the action that could follow from the verdict, the court said, “It is entirely up to the Election Commission to decide what action to take, even if it be countermanding the elections wherever such persons have participated as candidates. The satisfaction, the obligation and the responsibility is (sic) of the Election Commission of India.”
The judges noted there was enough evidence to suggest that the “administration of the state has tacitly connived and abetted the situation” by allowing conferences and darbars to be held by the candidates when in lawful custody and (by allowing them) to enjoy luxuries in public hospitals and to participate in electoral politics.
“The election is over; now the state government is reporting that they have been sent behind bars. Perhaps, the purpose is over. All the damage, which could be done, has been done. Again, the process of the election has been desecrated.
“The man in police custody seeking freedom in a public hospital has mocked the law, the administration and the machinery which administers and monitors the election. The EC will have to take all these factors into account.”