NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court has said merely because the winning candidate has not disclosed information related to the assets, courts should not rush to invalidate the election by adopting a highly pedantic and fastidious approach.
"While disclosure of criminal antecedents in the electoral process was the most critical element to maintain the purity of the electoral process which has to be scrupulously adhered to, disclosure of assets and educational qualifications were considered as attending supplementary requirements to strengthen the electoral process, of which there will be certain scope for consideration as to whether it is of substantial or inconsequential nature," a bench of Justices Surya Kant and N Kotiswar Singh said.
The court emphasised, in such cases, it has to be ascertained if such concealment or non-disclosure was of such magnitude and substantial nature that it could have influenced the election result.
"The true test, in our opinion, would be whether the non-disclosure of information about assets in any case is of consequential or inconsequential import, finding of which will be the basis for declaring the election valid or void as the case may be," the bench said.
The court pointed out, this disclosure requirement so far as assets and educational qualification is concerned, should not be unreasonably stretched to invalidate an otherwise validly declared election over minor technical non compliances that are not of substantial character, and should not be the basis for nullification of the people’s mandate.
The court said the voice of the people and collective wisdom should be respected which can even be placed on the highest pedestal of divine authority.
"This right to know the backgrounds of candidates, which corresponds to their obligation to disclose such information, must, however, be balanced with the people's mandate expressed through ballot boxes, which is central to democracy," the bench said.
The court upheld dismissal an election petition filed by INC candidate Ajmera Shyam against election of Kova Laxmi as BRS candidate in Telangana Assembly elections held on December 3, 2023.
The bench said non disclosure of Income Tax returns for four financial years out of the last five financial years in the Form 26 Affidavit by the winning candidate was not a defect of substantial character.
The court said the right to know full particulars of the candidates as a vital part of Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution of India.
The participation by voters who are well-informed not only of the affairs of the state but also with knowledge of the candidates' backgrounds invigorates the electoral process, reaffirming that election is one of the fundamental features of democracy. Voters obtain essential information about the candidates through the exercise of the fundamental right to know about them, derived from Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution, the court said.
Disclaimer: This content is produced and published by LawStreet Journal Media for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. The views expressed are independent of any legal practice of the individuals involved.
