The Supreme Court has issued a two-week deadline to the Election Commission to respond to a petition filed by Ashwini Kumar Upadhyay, seeking a ban on individuals with a criminal background from contesting elections.
The petition, which has drawn significant attention, argues that such individuals should be permanently disqualified from participating in political processes.
In response to the petition, the central government filed an affidavit opposing the petition.
The government argued that individuals who have been convicted should not face a lifetime ban on contesting elections.
The government contended that Parliament has already established the criteria for disqualification based on specific conditions, including the criteria for declaring a person ineligible to hold office.
Additionally, the government challenged the petition, alleging that the petitioner’s arguments were vague and lacked sufficient clarity.
The central government requested the dismissal of the petition, pointing out that the current laws adequately cover the issues raised by the petitioners.
During previous hearings, the Supreme Court raised concerns about the differing treatment of government employees and elected officials when convicted of criminal charges.
The Court noted that while the government dismisses employees upon conviction, elected representatives like Members of Parliament (MPs) or Members of Legislative Assembly (MLAs) face only a six-year ban from contesting elections, after which they can run for office again.
The Court indicated that it should closely examine the existing legal provisions in Sections 8 and 9 of the Representation of People Act (RPA) in this regard.
Justices Surya Kant and Kotishwar emphasized the need to consider whether convicted individuals should be allowed to run for office.
Senior Advocate Vijay Hansaria, appointed as amicus curiae in the case, suggested that there should be a lifetime ban for those convicted of serious offenses.
The petition urges that any individual convicted of a crime punishable by two years or more in prison should face a permanent ban from contesting elections.
The petition also challenges the leniency given to such individuals under Section 8 of the Representation of People Act, arguing that allowing convicted leaders to contest after six years violates the right to equality guaranteed under Article 14 of the Constitution.
Furthermore, the amicus curiae suggested that the Election Commission could issue guidelines preventing political parties from appointing convicted criminals as party officials.
This would address the issue of parties favoring individuals with criminal backgrounds, further diluting the democratic process.
The Supreme Court’s ruling on this petition has the potential to reshape the landscape of Indian politics by addressing concerns about criminal influence in elections.
The Supreme Court has given the Election Commission two weeks to file its response, and the matter is likely to continue sparking discussions on the role of criminal records in political careers.
The Court’s ongoing investigation into this issue highlights the importance of political accountability and the role of legal reform in ensuring that the democratic process remains fair and transparent.
Also Read: Supreme Court Directs Governments To Address Exploitation In Private Hospitals
Colonel Mustafa urges youth to use geography actively for disaster management, policy, and national development.
India names a record 111-member team for Deaflympics 2025, competing across 11 sports disciplines.
PM Modi, Amit Shah, and leaders extend birthday wishes to Bharat Ratna LK Advani.
Justice Vikram Nath praised PM Modi’s vision for inclusive, tech-driven justice and legal empowerment.
Justice Surya Kant urged empathetic, tech-driven legal aid reforms to make justice accessible and inclusive.
Supreme Court to live stream NALSA’s National Conference and Legal Services Day celebrations online.