Recent Topic

10/recent/ticker-posts

About Me

Delhi High Court Upholds Dismissal of Plea Against AIMIM's Registration as a Political Party

 

Delhi High Court Upholds Dismissal of Plea Against AIMIM's Registration as a Political Party

The Delhi High Court upheld the dismissal of a petition challenging the registration of the All India Majlis-e-Ittehadul Musalimeen (AIMIM) as a political party by the Election Commission of India (ECI). The division bench, comprising Acting Chief Justice Vibhu Bakhru and Justice Tushar Rao Gedela, rejected the appeal filed by Tirupati Narashima Murari, who contested the single judge's decision from November 2024.

Background of the Case

AIMIM, established in 1958, received recognition from the ECI as a state-level party in Telangana in 2014. In 2018, Tirupati Narashima Murari, then a member of the Shiv Sena party, filed a petition challenging this recognition. He argued that AIMIM's constitution aimed to promote the interests of a single religious community, thereby violating the principles of secularism mandated by Section 29A of the Representation of the People Act, 1951. Murari contended that the party's objectives were contrary to the secular values that all political parties are required to uphold under the Indian Constitution and the RP Act.

Single Judge's Ruling

In November 2024, Justice Prateek Jalan dismissed Murari's petition. The court found that AIMIM had amended its constitution to align with the provisions of Section 29A(5) of the RP Act, which mandates that a political party's constitution should uphold the principles of secularism, democracy, and social justice. The judge concluded that the ECI did not possess the authority to deregister AIMIM based on the grounds presented by Murari.

Division Bench's Decision

Upon appeal, the division bench reviewed the case and concurred with the single judge's findings. The bench emphasized that AIMIM had revised its constitution to comply with Section 29A(5) of the RP Act, rendering Murari's arguments invalid. The court stated, "We find no infirmity with the conclusion of the learned Single Judge that the requirements of Section 29A(5) of the Act are fully satisfied. Therefore, there is no ground to de-register AIMIM as a political party on the ground that its constitution does not conform to Section 29A(5) of the RP Act."

Furthermore, the bench agreed that the ECI lacked the power to deregister AIMIM based on the reasons provided by Murari. Consequently, the appeal was deemed unmerited and dismissed.

Implications of the Judgment

This judgment reinforces the autonomy of political parties to define their constitutions, provided they adhere to the statutory requirements outlined in the RP Act. It also underscores the limitations of the ECI's authority concerning the deregistration of political parties, affirming that compliance with Section 29A(5) is sufficient for a party's continued registration.

The court's decision highlights the judiciary's role in upholding the principles of secularism and ensuring that political entities operate within the legal frameworks established by the Constitution and relevant statutes. By dismissing the appeal, the Delhi High Court has set a precedent that emphasizes the importance of constitutional conformity for political parties while delineating the scope of the ECI's regulatory powers.

Court Practice Community

WhatsApp Group Invite

Join WhatsApp Community


Post a Comment

0 Comments

'; (function() { var dsq = document.createElement('script'); dsq.type = 'text/javascript'; dsq.async = true; dsq.src = '//' + disqus_shortname + '.disqus.com/embed.js'; (document.getElementsByTagName('head')[0] || document.getElementsByTagName('body')[0]).appendChild(dsq); })();