Today(on 19th April),The Supreme Court dismissed an appeal regarding the rejection of nomination papers for the Lok Sabha elections and warned of potential chaos if such appeals were entertained.
Thank you for reading this post, don't forget to subscribe!
NEW DELHI: Today(on 19th April), The Supreme Court, led by Chief Justice D Y Chandrachud and Justice JB Pardiwala, unequivocally dismissed an appeal from a Bihar man seeking to contest the upcoming Lok Sabha elections as an Independent. The court firmly refused to entertain such petitions, citing the potential for “chaos” if it intervened in the electoral process.
The bench articulated a clear preference for the established procedure of filing election petitions over approaching the Supreme Court with grievances related to the rejection of nomination papers.
“If we were to entertain petitions under Article 32 of the Constitution against the rejection of nomination papers, it could lead to chaos. This provision grants the right to constitutional remedies for the enforcement of fundamental rights.”
– the bench stated, emphasizing the need for adherence to election laws and the appropriate channels for contesting nomination paper rejections.
Despite the dismissal, the bench did offer a sliver of recourse to Jawahar Kumar Jha, the Independent candidate from the Banka parliamentary constituency, whose aspirations were curtailed by the rejection of his nomination by the returning officer (RO).
Represented by lawyer Alakh Alok Srivastava, Jha was advised to seek appropriate legal remedies for his situation.
Chief Justice Chandrachud advised during the hearing-
“We decline to entertain the plea against the rejection of the nomination papers. Even if we were to issue notice and hear the matter, it would extend beyond the elections. The petitioner must adhere to the discipline of election law and pursue available remedies.”
In his plea to the Supreme Court, Jha had sought intervention to ensure a more transparent and less arbitrary process in the handling of nomination papers by the returning officers, citing the “arbitrary and mala fide” exercise of discretion as a threat to democratic processes.
The Representation of the People Act, 1951, specifically Section 36(4), stipulates that nomination papers should not be rejected for defects not deemed of a “substantial character”
Yet, Jha argued, the lack of a clear definition for what constitutes a “substantial defect” has led to a discretionary and often arbitrary application of this provision, endangering democracy by potentially sidelining eligible and popular candidates on questionable grounds.
Moreover, Jha’s petition included a plea for a directive to ROs nationwide, demanding they provide candidates a reasonable opportunity to rectify any marked defects in their nomination papers, aiming for a fairer and more transparent electoral process.
The Banka parliamentary constituency is set for its polling day on April 26th, as voters prepare to cast their ballots in the upcoming elections.
