New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Friday refused to entertain a plea seeking direction to the Election Commission (EC) to take immediate steps to put in place an effective mechanism to resolve the issue of "namesake" candidates contesting elections. Was demanded.
After a bench headed by Justice BR Gavai showed reluctance to consider the plea, the petitioner's counsel sought permission to withdraw it.
The bench, also comprising Justice Satish Chandra Sharma and Justice Sandeep Mehta, allowed the petition to be withdrawn.
"If someone is born as Rahul Gandhi or someone is born as Lalu Prasad Yadav, how can they be stopped from contesting elections? Will this not affect their rights?" the bench asked lawyer VK Biju, who appeared in the court on behalf of petitioner Sabu Stephen.
Describing the issue as "extremely serious", Biju had cited Rule 22(3) of the Conduct of Elections Rules, 1961, which states that if the names of two or more candidates are the same, they should be considered for their profession. Apart from will be separated.Residence or in any other manner.
"If someone's parents have given the same name, can it hinder their right to contest elections?" the bench asked.
“You know what is the fate of the matter,” it said to Biju.
After this the lawyer asked the bench to allow him to withdraw the petition.
The bench said, "Let withdrawal be allowed."
The petition said the unfair practice of fielding 'namesake' candidates is an age-old ploy to create confusion in the minds of voters.
It said such practices need to be reduced on a war footing as "each vote" has the power to decide the future of a candidate."Therefore, replacing 'confusion' with 'clarity' is the need of the hour, which can be achieved through appropriate amendments, amendments to the Representation of the People Act, 1951 and the Conduct of Elections Rules, 1961. Moreover, this is an unhealthy and It is a corrupt democratic practice,” the petitioner said.
It claims that the "namesake" candidates have no knowledge of the political and administrative systems in India and are receiving "sponsorship" including money, material and other offers from rival political parties."However, the petitioner is not claiming that all independent candidates are fake or saying that those candidates do not have the right to contest elections, however, there should be an effective check and proper mechanism to avoid name-calling candidates, Which is the need of the hour,” the petition said
After a bench headed by Justice BR Gavai showed reluctance to consider the plea, the petitioner's counsel sought permission to withdraw it.
The bench, also comprising Justice Satish Chandra Sharma and Justice Sandeep Mehta, allowed the petition to be withdrawn.
"If someone is born as Rahul Gandhi or someone is born as Lalu Prasad Yadav, how can they be stopped from contesting elections? Will this not affect their rights?" the bench asked lawyer VK Biju, who appeared in the court on behalf of petitioner Sabu Stephen.
Describing the issue as "extremely serious", Biju had cited Rule 22(3) of the Conduct of Elections Rules, 1961, which states that if the names of two or more candidates are the same, they should be considered for their profession. Apart from will be separated.Residence or in any other manner.
"If someone's parents have given the same name, can it hinder their right to contest elections?" the bench asked.
“You know what is the fate of the matter,” it said to Biju.
After this the lawyer asked the bench to allow him to withdraw the petition.
The bench said, "Let withdrawal be allowed."
The petition said the unfair practice of fielding 'namesake' candidates is an age-old ploy to create confusion in the minds of voters.
It said such practices need to be reduced on a war footing as "each vote" has the power to decide the future of a candidate."Therefore, replacing 'confusion' with 'clarity' is the need of the hour, which can be achieved through appropriate amendments, amendments to the Representation of the People Act, 1951 and the Conduct of Elections Rules, 1961. Moreover, this is an unhealthy and It is a corrupt democratic practice,” the petitioner said.
It claims that the "namesake" candidates have no knowledge of the political and administrative systems in India and are receiving "sponsorship" including money, material and other offers from rival political parties."However, the petitioner is not claiming that all independent candidates are fake or saying that those candidates do not have the right to contest elections, however, there should be an effective check and proper mechanism to avoid name-calling candidates, Which is the need of the hour,” the petition said
