UNION OF INDIA versus ASSOCIATION FOR DEMOCRATIC REFORMS AND ANR.

Citation: [2002] 3 S.C.R. 696 · Decided: 02-05-2002 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: M.B. SHAH · Disposal: Case Partly allowed

Cited by 17 judgment(s) · see the full citation network in Lexace

Judgment (excerpt)

A 
UNION OF INDIA 
v. 
ASSOCIATION FOR DEMOCRATIC REFORMS AND ANR. 
MAY 2, 2002 
B 
[M.B. SHAH, BISHESHWAR PRASAD SINGH AND H.K. SEMA, JJ.] 
Constitution of India, 1950: 
Article 324-Powers of Election Commission-To issue directions for 
C conducting free and fair election-Absence of amendmil!nt to that effect in 
election law-Effect of-Held, even then the Election Commission has power 
under Article 324 which is reservoir of power and plena1y in character-
limitation on such plenary character of power is when legislature makes a 
valid law relating to election-Representation of People Act, 1951-Conduct 
D of Election Rules, 1961. 
Articles 32, 141and142-Power of Court to issue direction on subject 
regarding which Act and Rules are silent-Authority implementing the law 
has constitutional and statutory power to implement the same-Held, Court 
can issue directions or orders on such subject to fill the vacuum or void till 
E suitable law is enacted-legislation-Need for-Directions by Court mean 
while. 
F 
Article 19(a/--Scope and ambit of-Right to know about candidates 
contesting elections-Held, freedom of speech and expression would include 
such right within its ambit. 
Words and Phrases-"Superintendence, direction and control", "conduct 
of all election" and "elections"-Meaning of in the context of Article 324(/) 
of Constitution of India, 1950. 
Respondent tiled Writ Petition for direction to implement the 
G recommendation made by l 70th Report of Law Commission and Vohra 
Committee Report and for a direction to the Election Commission to 
provide information by amending Form 2A to 2E prescribed under the 
Conduct of Election Rules, 1961. 
High Court directed the Election Commission to secure the voters the 
H 
696 
....._ 
• 
)L 
-
r 
U.0.1. v. ASSOCIATION FOR DEMOCRATIC REFORMS 
697 
following information pertaining to each candidate contesting election to A 
the Parliament and to State Legislatures and the parties they present: 
l. Whether the candidate is accused of any offence(s) punishable with 
imprisonment? If so, the details thereof. 
2. Assets possessed by candidate, his or her spouse and dependent 
relations. 
3. Facts giving insight the candidate's competence, capacity and 
suitability for acting as parliamentarian or legislator including details of 
B 
his/ her educational qualification. 
C 
4. Information which the Election Commission considers necessary 
for judging the capacity and capability of the political party fielding the 
candidate for election. 
In appeal to this Court, the appellant contended that High Court 
could not have given direction to the Election Commission till suitable 
amendments were made for the Representation of People Act, 1951 and 
Conduct of Election Rules, 1961 and the direction would be of no 
consequence as the Act and the Rules do not disqualify a candidate for non-
disclosure of assets or pending charges in criminal cases. 
Intervenor in the case contended that High Court could not have 
given direction once Parliament had not amended the Act or the Rules 
despite the recommendations of Law Commission and Vohra Committee; 
and that the citizens do not have right to know about the personal affairs 
of M.P.s and M.L.As. 
Respondents contended that Article 324 of the Constitution of India 
gives power to the Election Commission and the same should be interpreted 
in a broad perspective. 
Petitioners, in connected writ petition, contended that even if 
presumed that High Court did not have jurisdiction to pass orders this 
Court has jurisdiction to do so in exercise of its power under Article 142 
of the Constitution. 
D 
E 
F 
G 
Thus the questions for consideration were whether Election Commission H 
698 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
[2002] 3 S.C.R. 
A was empowered to issue directions as ordered by High Court; and whether 
a voter has right to get relevant information such as assets, qualification 
and involvement in offence for being educated and informed for judging 
the suitability of a candidate contesting election. 
B 
Partly allowing the appeal and the connected writ petition, the Court 
HELD : I. I. It cannot be said that if there is no provision in 
Representation of People Act, 1951 or Conduct of Election Rules, 1961 the 
High Court ought not to have issued such directions to the Election 
Commission. In case where law is silent, Article 324 is a reservoir of power 
c to act for the avowed purpose of having free and fair election. Constitution 
has taken care of 

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.