Uttarakhand HC Issues Extensive Guidelines To Curb Pre-Poll Corruption To Offices Of Block Pramukhs And Zila Panchayats

The Uttarakhand High Court on Thursday issued extensive guidelines and directions to the State Election Commission and the state government to ensure free and fair elections at block and district level Panchayat heads in the State. The directions were passed by a division bench of Chief Justice Ramesh Ranganathan and Justice Alok Kumar Verma in two public interest litigations filed by Vipul Jain and Ashirvad Goswami. The Petitioners alleged that electoral candidates often bribed and threatened voters, which determined the "flawed outcomes" of indirect elections to the offices of Block Pramukhs, and Chairmen of Zila Panchayats. Thus, in order to eliminate all possible sources of corruption such as sponsored foreign trips, kidnapping, sale of votes etc., the Petitioners had sought appropriate directions to the Respondent authorities to frame extensive guidelines, governing the conduct of Panchayati elections in the State of Uttarakhand. They had also sought reduction in the time-frame between different tiers of elections so that buying and selling of votes could be stopped. At the outset of the judgment, the court expressed its skepticism as to whether it could issue directions to make laws, that too to a Constitutional body, such as the State Election Commission. In this regard, while citing a plethora of precedents which enumerated the powers of a high court under Article 226 of the Constitution, along with settled position that no court should direct a subordinate legislative body to enact or not to enact a law which it may be competent to enact, the bench concluded that the High Court could exercise powers under Article 226 of the Constitution in cases where the State Election Commission had failed to discharge its constitutional obligation to hold free and fair elections. "The jurisdiction of the High Court, under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, can always be invoked for the failure of the State Election Commission to discharge its constitutional obligations of holding free and fair elections," the bench said. Notwithstanding the guidelines and Model Code of Conduct issued by the State Election Commission from time to time, the court noted that neither the Government nor the Commission had framed policies to curb pre-poll corruption. In this regard a reference was made to S. Subramaniam Balaji v. State of T.N., whereby considering that there was no enactment that directly governed the issue, the Supreme Court had directed the Election Commission to frame guidelines for the same. Further relying on Union of India v. Assn. for Democratic Reforms, the bench stated that it was not possible for a Court to give any directions for amending the Act or the statutory Rules. Nonetheless, if there is no provision in the Act or the Rules, it could issue directions to the Election Commission However, it stated that the farthest that it could go was to "request" the Legislature to consider the feasibility of making laws/Rules to provide measures to prevent occurrence of electoral malpractices, instead of waiting, till after the event, for the long drawn process of post-election correction to be undertaken. Treating the aforementioned cases as precedents, the division bench issued the following directions: Necessary guidelines should be issued and wide publicity given, regarding the names and designations of election officials to whom the general public may complain if corrupt electoral practices come to their notice.The State Election Commission should consider framing guidelines regarding the nature of action the officials, to whom such complaints are addressed, should take. The State Election Commission should inform in writing, the candidates contesting elections, of its power to postpone elections till it is able to ensure free and fair elections, or to countermand the elections, and to hold elections afresh, in case it is satisfied that the election process is vitiated by electoral malpractices.The State Election Commission should adopt a pro-active approach in discharging its constitutional obligations of ensuring a free and fair election, and to curb corrupt electoral practices.On receipt of credible information, State Election Commission should initiate inquiry against suspected candidates and if, on such inquiry, it is found that the complaints are true, forthwith action must be taken to nip the corrupt electoral practices in the bud.All men and machinery involved in the election process, including the District Magistrates and the District Superintendents of Police, function under the overall control of the State Election Commission, for the discharge of their election duties, till the entire election process is completed.Any complaint received by the District Magistrates and the District Superintendents of Police should not only be forwarded to the State Election Commission forthwith, but immediate...

Uttarakhand HC Issues Extensive Guidelines To Curb Pre-Poll Corruption To Offices Of Block Pramukhs And Zila Panchayats

Akshita Saxena

Tags