The Delhi High Court dismissed a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) that sought the de-recognition of the Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) for allegedly failing to disclose the criminal antecedents of its candidates, particularly in relation to the purported liquor scam. The petitioner, Ashwani Mudgal, contended that AAP violated a Supreme Court mandate requiring political parties and their candidates to publish information regarding any criminal charges against them.
The division bench, comprising Chief Justice Devendra Kumar Upadhyay and Justice Tushar Rao Gedela, emphasized that the appropriate forum for addressing non-compliance with Supreme Court judgments is the Supreme Court itself. Justice Gedela noted that any perceived non-compliance should be pursued through a contempt petition filed directly with the Apex Court, rather than through a writ petition under Article 226 in the High Court.
During the proceedings, the counsel representing the Election Commission of India (ECI) clarified that the ECI lacks statutory authority to de-recognize a political party. In response, the bench advised the petitioner to approach the Supreme Court to address any instances of non-compliance with its directives. Chief Justice Upadhyay further elucidated that the PIL did not pertain to individual cases or nominations but was concerned with the broader issue of adherence to the Supreme Court's directives on the disclosure of criminal antecedents by political parties.
The court concluded that, given the absence of legal provisions empowering the ECI to de-recognize political parties, it could not grant the relief sought by the petitioner. Consequently, the PIL was dismissed, with the bench reiterating that the petitioner should seek recourse from the Supreme Court regarding any alleged non-compliance with its judgment.
This decision underscores the judiciary's delineation of jurisdictional boundaries and reinforces the principle that enforcement of Supreme Court mandates falls within the purview of the Apex Court. It also highlights the limitations of the Election Commission's authority concerning the de-recognition of political parties, pointing to a potential area for legislative review to ensure compliance with judicial directives aimed at promoting transparency in the political process.
0 Comments
Thank you for your response. It will help us to improve in the future.