SC declines plea on candidates contesting from more than one seat

New Delhi,

February 2: On Thursday, the Supreme

Court refused to set aside the provision in the election law, which allows

candidates to contest polls from simultaneously two constituencies, saying it

is a matter of “legislative policy”.

"Times New Roman","serif";color:black">This is declining to quash the law that

allows candidates to contest election from more than one constituency in an

election. The Apex court disposed off the PIL. According to reports by

the agency, SC says permitting a candidate to contest for more than one seat is

a matter of legislative policy.

"Times New Roman","serif";color:black">  

"Times New Roman","serif";color:black">

Also Read: Journalist Siddique Kappan walks out of Lucknow jail on bail

The bench is headed by

the Chief Justice DY Chandrachud said that the candidates may contest election

from different seat. The bench is comprising of justices PS Narasimha and JB

Pardiwala, he is dealing with a petition which is filed by advocate Ashwini

Kumar Upadhyay. Upadhyay had sought to declare section 33(7) of the

Representation of the People Act, 1951, which allows a person to contest a

general election or a group of by-polls or biennial elections from two

constituencies.font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";color:black">

"Candidates contesting from more than one

seat may do it for a variety of reasons," the bench said.

"Permitting a candidate to contest from more

than one seat...is a matter of legislative policy since it is ultimately the

Parliament's will as to whether the political democracy in the country is

furthered by granting such a choice," it said.

"Times New Roman","serif";color:black;background:white">Recently, the top court

observed that in the absence of any manifest arbitrariness under the section

33(7) of the 1951 Act, it is not possible for it to strike the provision down.color:black">

font-variant-caps: normal;orphans: 2;widows: 2;-webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px;

text-decoration-thickness: initial;text-decoration-style: initial;text-decoration-color: initial;

float:none;word-spacing:0px">Senior advocate Gopal Sankaranarayanan, during the

argument, appeared in the court on behalf of Upadhyay. He further said that if

a candidate contests an election from two seats and gets elected from both, the

candidate has to vacate one seat, which will lead to a bypoll that will be an

additional financial burden on the exchequer.

font-variant-caps: normal;orphans: 2;widows: 2;-webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px;

text-decoration-thickness: initial;text-decoration-style: initial;text-decoration-color: initial;

float:none;word-spacing:0px">He further said that prior to a 1996 amendment,

there was no bar on the number of seats a candidate could contest in an

election. The amendment restricted that number to two. The bench observed that it is for Parliament to decide

whether a candidate can contest an election from more than one seat.

font-variant-caps: normal;orphans: 2;widows: 2;-webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px;

text-decoration-thickness: initial;text-decoration-style: initial;text-decoration-color: initial;

float:none;word-spacing:0px">"When you contest from two seats, you do not

know from where you will get elected. What is wrong about it? This is part of

electoral democracy," the court said during the hearing.

font-variant-caps: normal;orphans: 2;widows: 2;-webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px;

text-decoration-thickness: initial;text-decoration-style: initial;text-decoration-color: initial;

float:none;word-spacing:0px">
Also Read: Adani not to go ahead with fully subscribed FPO

- With inputs from agencies