The Supreme Court’s refusal to allow the plea of the substitute candidate seeking to represent the Indian National Congress in the Indore Lok Sabha constituency affirms the ongoing election process. While the court declined intervention at this stage, it emphasized that the question of law could be raised in an election petition.
NEW DELHI: This week (6th May): The Supreme Court dismissed a plea filed by an individual seeking to be the substitute candidate for the Indian National Congress (INC) in the Indore Lok Sabha constituency. The court refused to intervene in the ongoing election process but stated that the question of law could be raised in an election petition.
READ ALSO: Telangana High Court Invalidates Vithal’s MLC Election
The decision came after the Madhya Pradesh High Court had earlier rejected the appeal filed by the Congress’ substitute candidate, who had sought to contest the election after the party’s original candidate withdrew to join the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP).
The Supreme Court, comprising a Bench of Justices Surya Kant and KV Viswanathan, declined the plea by the substitute candidate to be included in the election for the Indore Lok Sabha constituency.
“The allocation of EVMs and symbols has already taken place. Why did you wait for seven days before approaching the apex court? Unprecedented events are occurring, but your appeal could have been made earlier. You could have sought provisional nomination from the High Court first, and then approached us. Legal questions may be raised in an election petition, even by an elector. We will leave this option open,” the Court stated.
Background
The Madhya Pradesh High Court had earlier dismissed the appeal of the Congress’ substitute candidate, Moti Singh, on May 4. Singh had requested the allocation of the Congress symbol to contest the election in Indore after the party’s original candidate, Akshay Kanti Bam, withdrew his nomination on April 29. Singh’s plea was initially rejected by a single-judge of the High Court on April 30 and subsequently by a division bench, prompting his appeal to the Supreme Court.
During the Supreme Court hearing, Senior Advocate Ravi Shankar Jandhyala represented Singh in his plea. However, the court upheld the decision of the Returning Officer, who had rejected Singh’s nomination papers on April 26, citing his status as a substitute candidate.
“Today, the apex court declined to set aside a decision by the Returning Officer to reject the nomination of independent candidate Shaik Toufeeq from the Malkajgiri Parliamentary Constituency in Telangana. Justice Kant, in dismissing the appeal, urged the parties to prepare for an election petition instead of filing an SLP, stating, ‘We are not here for this type of seasonal litigation!'”
In a related matter, the Supreme Court also upheld the decision of the Returning Officer to reject the nomination of independent candidate Shaik Toufeeq from the Malkajgiri Parliamentary Constituency in Telangana. The court advised the candidates to focus on filing election petitions rather than pursuing Special Leave Petitions (SLPs) for such matters, emphasizing that the court should not be burdened with seasonal litigation.
Case Title: Moti Singh v. Election Commission and ors
