)
The Supreme Court on Wednesday dismissed the review petition of the government, standing by its July 10 ruling that convicted persons cannot contest elections to the state legislature or Parliament.
There is no “apparent error on record”, the bench of A K Patnaik and Justice S J Mukhopadhaya said, after an hour-long argument. The same bench’s judgment had united politicians against the Supreme Court, readying Bills to negate the decision.
The judges observed they had only interpreted the election law and not overstepped the boundaries of judicial review. Referring to the new Bill on the issue, the Bench remarked it had only followed the judgment. The law as it stood was “clumsily drafted”, they said, and added it was for law makers to clarify terms such as elector and voter.
In another review petition, the bench issued notices to the Chief Election Commissioner, the Bihar government and Jan Chowkidar, an organisation which had moved a writ petition in the Patna high court. It was in that petition that the high court had barred arrested persons from elections. The Supreme Court had upheld the view. However, since some parties were not heard in that appeal, the court will hear the review petition on October 23, after replies from all parties concerned.
While the Rajya Sabha has passed a Bill to negate that ruling, the Lok Sabha is yet to consider it.
Referring to the Representation of the People Act, the judges criticised the provision which were apparently contradictory. “When a candidate is in jail, it is okay for him to contest. But when a voter is in jail, he can’t vote. What kind of law is this?” the judges wondered.
There is no “apparent error on record”, the bench of A K Patnaik and Justice S J Mukhopadhaya said, after an hour-long argument. The same bench’s judgment had united politicians against the Supreme Court, readying Bills to negate the decision.
The judges observed they had only interpreted the election law and not overstepped the boundaries of judicial review. Referring to the new Bill on the issue, the Bench remarked it had only followed the judgment. The law as it stood was “clumsily drafted”, they said, and added it was for law makers to clarify terms such as elector and voter.
In another review petition, the bench issued notices to the Chief Election Commissioner, the Bihar government and Jan Chowkidar, an organisation which had moved a writ petition in the Patna high court. It was in that petition that the high court had barred arrested persons from elections. The Supreme Court had upheld the view. However, since some parties were not heard in that appeal, the court will hear the review petition on October 23, after replies from all parties concerned.
While the Rajya Sabha has passed a Bill to negate that ruling, the Lok Sabha is yet to consider it.
Referring to the Representation of the People Act, the judges criticised the provision which were apparently contradictory. “When a candidate is in jail, it is okay for him to contest. But when a voter is in jail, he can’t vote. What kind of law is this?” the judges wondered.
