The 2019 parliamentary election victory of the then-Member of Parliament from the Theni constituency was declared null and void by the Madras High Court. This decision, however, has been kept up in the air for a month to make room for an appeal.
Backdrop of the Case
The plaintiff in this case cited that the accused failed to reveal his accurate assets and liabilities in Form 26 of his election affidavit – a requirement under Rule 4A of Conduct of Election Rules, 1961. Added allegations include the engagement in corrupt practices like vote buying, which infringes section 123 of the Representation of the People (RP) Act, 1951. The court deduced that the returning officer, who was responsible for supervising the nominations, did not follow Section 36 of the RP Act, nor the guidelines laid out in the Handbook.
Understanding the Conduct of Elections Rules, 1961
The Conduct of Elections Rules, 1961 is a framework established under the RP Act, 1951, governing various aspects of Indian elections. It provides procedures for candidates, political parties, election officials, and voters to follow during electoral process such as filing nominations, scrutinizing nominations, campaign regulations etc. It also mandates an affidavit (Form 26) from candidates stating their assets and liabilities.
Defining ‘Corrupt Practices’ in the Framework of RP Act, 1951
Section 123 of the RP Act, 1951 categorizes actions like bribery, undue influence, providing false information, and promoting disharmony among citizens on grounds of religion, race, caste, community, or language as ‘corrupt practices’. If convicted on these counts, an elected representative can face disqualification.
Additional Provisions for Disqualifying a Member of Parliament
According to the RPA, 1951, an MP can be barred from holding his/her position if they have been convicted for any offence that results in multiple years of imprisonment. This doesn’t apply for those detained under preventive detention law. An MP must not hold any interest in government contracts, works or services nor be a director or managing agent or hold an office of profit in a corporation where the government owns at least 25% share.
Court Observations on Corrupt Practices in Past Cases
There have been noteworthy rulings related to corrupt practices in the past. In the Abhiram Singh v C.D. Commachen Case (2017), the Supreme Court declared that if votes are solicited on the grounds of a candidate’s religion, race, caste, community, language, it leads to annulment of the election. The same verdict was passed in the SR Bommai v. Union of India case (1994).
About the Representation of the People Act 1951
This act regulates the conduct of elections in India, providing provisions to curb malpractices, resolve disputes, and dictate the qualifications and disqualifications for MP candidacy. It is pivotal for Indian democracy as it prevents individuals with criminal backgrounds from entering the representative bodies, enforcing transparency in electoral funding and ensuring fair conduct of elections.
UPSC Civil Services Examination – Previous Year Questions (PYQ)
A question asked in the prelims of the 2021 UPSC Civil Services Exam was related to the laws restricting candidates from contesting in one Lok Sabha election from multiple constituencies. Here, it was clarified that as per the amendment made to the RP Act, 1951 in 1996, a candidate can contest from only two constituencies, thus invalidating statement 1 of the question. Statement 3 was also incorrect as it results in financial burden on public exchequer and unnecessary use of government resources for holding by-elections against the resultant vacancy. The only correct statement was that Shri Devi Lal did contest from three Lok Sabha seats in the 1991 election.