The Supreme Court ruled that candidates who hide past convictions in their nomination forms will be disqualified from elections, stressing the importance of transparency and honesty in maintaining the integrity of India’s democratic process.
New Delhi: The Supreme Court determined that candidates who fail to disclose prior convictions on their nomination forms will face disqualification from election.
This ruling delivered by Justices P. S. Narasimha and A. S. Chandurkar during the hearing of an appeal from former councillor Poonam, who lost her position for not revealing her criminal conviction in her election nomination.
Poonam, who had served as a municipal councillor in Nagar Parishad, Bhikangaon, Madhya Pradesh, was convicted in a cheque bounce case, resulting in a one-year prison sentence and an order for compensation.
Also Read: Lok Sabha Elections 2024 | SC Dismisses Appeal on Rejection of Nomination Papers
Seeking to set-aside her removal, Poonam appealed to the Supreme Court for protection against disqualification.
However, the bench denied her request, emphasizing the necessity of transparency in elections.
The court stated,
“Once it is found that there has been non-disclosure of a previous conviction by a candidate, it creates an impediment in the free exercise of electoral right by a voter. A voter is thus deprived of making an informed and advised choice. It would be a case of suppression/non-disclosure by such a candidate, which renders the election void.”
This ruling reinforces the Supreme Court’s stance that honesty and complete disclosure in nomination forms are vital for upholding the integrity of the democratic process
Under the Representation of the People Act, 1951 (RPA), several provisions mandate transparency from candidates contesting elections.
Section 33A, inserted through the Representation of the People (Amendment) Act, 2002 following the Supreme Court’s ruling in Union of India v. Association for Democratic Reforms (2002), makes it compulsory for every candidate to disclose key personal and legal details.
These include any criminal antecedents, such as convictions or pending cases, along with information about their assets and liabilities (including those of their spouse and dependents) and educational qualifications.
Further, Section 125A of the Act prescribes punishment for filing a false affidavit or incomplete disclosure. A candidate who deliberately furnishes incorrect information or withholds relevant facts in their nomination affidavit can face imprisonment for up to six months, or a fine, or both.
In addition, Section 36(2)(a) authorises the Returning Officer to reject a nomination if the accompanying affidavit or nomination paper does not comply with legal requirements or contains false or incomplete information, ensuring integrity in the electoral process.