Needless to say, no one can either be taxed or penalized for holding an opinion which is not in conformity with constitutional values. It is only when an opinion gets translated into action and such action results in injury or harm or loss, an action in tort will lie. Courts cannot turn a blind […]Read more "Morality of Constitutional Tort"
Raja Ram Pal v. Hon’ble Speaker, Lok Sabha, (2007) 3 SCC 184 delineated principles. These principles have been restated in Amarinder Singh v. Special Committee, Punjab Vidhan Sabha, (2010) 6 SCC 113. It is open to demonstrate, ‘action’ of Legislature is manifestly arbitrary. As expounded in Amarinder Singh, important consideration for scrutinizing exercise of legislative […]Read more "Action Against Gross Disorder"
The question had been floating for a while. It was January 1, 2019 when I wondered who amongst then Chief Justices of HCs, if elevated, could be our 51st CJI. January 18, 2019 – we finally received an answer. CJI No. 51 would be Hon’ble Justice Sanjiv Khanna who wasn’t ever a Chief Justice of […]Read more "The Nature of Judicial Power: Article No. 1101"
The nation continues to wait, and is losing patience. A political party can always give a reason, a candidate with criminal antecedents is found to be more suitable than a person who does not have criminal antecedents. If the political party is of the prima facie opinion, a candidate has been falsely implicated, it can […]Read more "Monstrosity of Winnability II"
K.T.M.S. Mohammad v. Union of India, 1992 3 SCC 178; Amarsang Nathaji v. Hardik Harshadbhai Patel, 2017 1 SCC 113. _____ The present case relates to 151 K.R. Pura Legislative Assembly Constituency. We do not see any deliberate falsehood uttered, much less is there any inconsistency. Mere reference to inconsistent statements alone is not sufficient […]Read more "Deliberate Falsehood"
Neeharika Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. v. State of Maharashtra (2021) SCC Online SC 315 reiterates parameters laid down in celebrated decision of State of Haryana v. Bhajan Lal, 1992 Supp (1) SCC 335. Seven Principles enunciated in Paragraph 102 of Bhajan Lal [Two-Member Bench] are actually quoted with approval in Neeharika [Three-Member Bench]. Paragraph 37 of […]Read more "Section 482 of The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 V / Supremacy of Ballot v. Authority of Police"
The disqualification under Section 8 of The Representation of the People Act, 1951 is relatable to Article 191(1)(e). Therefore, any interpretation to Section 8 should be in sync with the constitutional scheme. Once the period of disqualification starts running, the seat, hitherto held by the person disqualified, becomes vacant by virtue of Article 190(3). His […]Read more "Timing of Votes"
P.A. Mohammed Riyas v. M.K. Raghavan, (2012) 5 SCC 511 was overruled in G.M. Siddeshwar v. Prasanna Kumar, (2013) 4 SCC 776 on the question whether it is imperative to file an affidavit in terms of Order VI, Rule 15(4) of The Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 in support of the averments made in the […]Read more "Election Petitions III"
Charan Lal Sahu v. Giani Zail Singh, (1984) 1 SCC 390 must clearly govern the present case. It is settled, where a person has no interest at all, or no sufficient interest to support a legal claim or action, he will have no locus standi to sue. The entitlement to sue or locus standi is […]Read more "Maintenance of Election Petitions"
Constitution Bench in Konappa Rudrappa Nadgouda v. Viswanath Reddy, AIR 1969 SC 604 cautioned, the rule for exclusion of votes, secured by corrupt practices by the returned candidate, in the computation of the total votes and the consequential declaration of the candidate who secured the next highest number of votes as duly elected, can be […]Read more "Exclusion of Votes"
There can be no doubt, the principle which appears to have evolved over a period of time is, the law frowns upon determining a day with reference to its fractions. The principle, ‘fractions of the day’ are eschewed from consideration, is not a universal principle which knows no exceptions. Clearly the context and the purpose […]Read more "Day-Fraction"
E.P. Royappa, (1974) 4 SCC 3 is clear, the burden of establishing mala fides is very heavily on the person who alleges it. Courts should not uphold a plea of mala fides on the basis of mere probabilities. _____ It is said, a Judge must not alter the material of which the Act is woven, […]Read more "The Tenth Schedule"
“When criminality enters into the grass-root level as well as at the higher levels there is a feeling that ‘monstrosity’ is likely to wither away the multitude and eventually usher in a dreadful fear that would rule supreme creating an incurable chasm in the spine of the whole citizenry” [Hon’ble Justice Dipak Misra, 05.02.2015]. In […]Read more "Monstrosity of Winnability I"
Sub-section (3) of Section 123 of The Representation of the People Act, 1951 deems the following to be a ‘corrupt practice’: “The appeal by a candidate or his agent or by any other person with the consent of a candidate or his election agent to vote or refrain from voting for any person on the […]Read more "‘His’ Story: Section 123(3) of The Representation of the People Act, 1951"
“The question whether an election petition challenging the election of a returned candidate on the ground of corrupt practice is required to be accompanied either by one affidavit or two affidavits in view of the insertion of clause (4) of Rule 15 of Order VI, fell for consideration of this Court in P.A. Mohammed Riyas […]Read more "Hon’ble Justice J. Chelameswar on Election Petitions II"
Section 83(1)(a) of The Representation of the People Act, 1951 reads as follows: “An election petition shall contain a concise statement of the material facts on which the petitioner relies.” In Ashraf Kokkur v. Abdul Khader, (2015) 1 SCC 129 it was considered, The Concise Oxford Dictionary has defined ‘concise’ as “giving a lot of […]Read more "Unwitty Election Petitions"
In view of Section 83(1)(c) of The Representation of the People Act, 1951 in the event of an election petitioner alleging corrupt practices – not only should his petition be verified in the manner laid down in The Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 but should also be accompanied by an affidavit, in the prescribed form, […]Read more "Hon’ble Justice J. Chelameswar on Election Petitions I"
Order XXXIX of The Supreme Court Rules, 1966 deals with Election Petitions under Part III of The Presidential and Vice-Presidential Elections Act, 1952. In Purno Agitok Sangma v. Pranab Mukherjee, (2013) 2 SCC 239 Petitioner questioned the Election of Respondent as President of India under Article 71 of the Constitution read with Order XXXIX of the […]Read more "Shri Pranab Mukherjee’s Election"