RAMBABU SINGH THAKUR versus SUNIL ARORA & ORS.

Citation: [2020] 2 S.C.R. 925 · Decided: 13-02-2020 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: R.F. NARIMAN · Disposal: Disposed off
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this case
Judgment (excerpt)

A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
925
RAMBABU SINGH THAKUR
v.
SUNIL ARORA & ORS.
(Contempt Pet. (C) No. 2192 of 2018)
In
(W.P. (C) No. 536 of 2011)
FEBRUARY 13, 2020
[R. F. NARIMAN AND S. RAVINDRA BHAT, JJ.]
Election Laws: Criminalisation of politics in India – In *Public
Interest Foundation and Ors. v. Union of India, this Court had issued
certain directions observing the increasing criminalisation of politics
in India and a lack of information about such criminalisation
amongst the citizenry – In the instant case, documents placed on
record showed an alarming increase in the incidence of criminals
in politics over the last four general elections – No explanation
offered by the political parties regarding pending criminal cases
against their candidates – Therefore, in exercise of constitutional
powers under Arts.129 and 142, directions  passed making it
mandatory for political parties to upload on their website detailed
information regarding individuals with pending criminal cases who
have been selected as candidates along with reason for such
selection – The reasons as to selection should  be with reference to
the qualifications, achievements and merit of the candidate
concerned, and not mere “winnability” at the polls – Such
information is to be also published in national and one local
vernacular newspaper and on the official social media platforms
of the political party, including Facebook and Twitter – These details
shall be published within 48 hours of the selection of the candidate
or not less than two weeks before the first date for filing of
nominations, whichever is earlier – The political party concerned
should then submit a report of compliance with these directions with
the Election Commission within 72 hours of the selection of the said
candidate – If a political party fails to submit such compliance report
with the Election Commission, the Election Commission shall bring
such non-compliance by the political party concerned to the notice
of the Supreme Court as being in contempt of this Court’s orders/
 [2020] 2 S.C.R. 925
925
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
926
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
[2020] 2 S.C.R.
directions – Contempt petitions disposed of – Constitution of India
– Arts.129 and 142.
*Public Interest Foundation and Ors. v. Union of India (2019)
3 SCC 224 – relied on
Case Law Reference
(2019) 3 SCC 224
relied on
Para 1
INHERENT JURISDICTION: Contempt Petition (C) No. 2192
of 2018 in Writ Petition (Civil) No. 536 of 2011.
Petition filed for non-compliance of the Judgment dated 25.09.2018
passed by this Hon'ble Court in Writ Petition (Civil) No. 536 of 2011.
With
Contempt Petition (C) No. 428/2019 in W.P. (C) No. 536/2011
Contempt Petition (C) No. 464/2019 in W.P. (C) No. 536/2011
Gopal Sankaranarayanan, Sr. Adv., Ashwani Kumar Dubey and
Sandeep Kumar Mishra, Advs. for the Petitioner.
Vikash Singh, Ms. Aishwarya Bhati, Sr. Advs., Amit Sharma,
Dipesh Sinha, Ms. Ayiala Imti, Ms. Deepika Kalia, Satwik Misra, Ms.
Shradha Deshmukh, Arvind Kumar Sharma, Ms. Sugandha Anand and
Kabir Dixit, Advs. for the Respondents.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by
R. F. NARIMAN, J.
1. This contempt petition raises grave issues regarding the
criminalisation of politics in India and brings to our attention a disregard
of the directions of a Constitution Bench of this Court in Public Interest
Foundation and Ors. v. Union of India and Anr. (2019) 3 SCC 224.
2. In this judgment, this Court was cognisant of the increasing
criminalisation of politics in India and the lack of information about such
criminalisation amongst the citizenry. In order to remedy this information
gap, this Court issued the following directions:
“116. Keeping the aforesaid in view, we think it appropriate to
issue the following directions which are in accord with the decisions
of this Court:
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
927
116.1. Each contesting candidate shall fill up the form as provided
by the Election Commission and the form must contain all the
particulars as required therein.
116.2. It shall state, in bold letters, with regard to the criminal
cases pending against the candidate.
116.3. If a candidate is contesting an election on the ticket of a
particular party, he/she is required to inform the party about the
criminal cases pending against him/her.
116.4. The political party concerned shall be obligated to put up
on its website the aforesaid information pertaining to candidates
having criminal antecedents.
116.5. The candidate as well as the political party concerned shall
issue a declara
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.