Previous 4 / 160 Next

Bar & Bench (www.barandbench.com) 4 candidate contesting the elections on behalf of a rival political party, during the night intervening between 29.03.2019 & 30.03.2019 and thereafter. It is understood from these news reports that excess cash amounting to several lakhs, if not crores, have been seized from the premises belonging to the said candidate as well as those belonging to his associates. It is understood that the Election Commission has subsequently initiated investigations into allegations that the said cash was intended to be used for the purpose of illegally influencing voters. 5. It is further contended that if the same is proved, it would only establish that the candidate has indulged in multiple violations of election laws, including Clause I(4) of the Model Code of Conduct (MCC) which mandates that candidates shall not commit any 'corrupt practices'. The said conduct is in violatin of other statutory provisions as well as the Manual on the MCC (March 2019 -Document No. 21, Edition No.l) issued by the Election Commission of India [Para 4.4.2(B)(IX)]. The said Manual mandates that Candidates shall not carry / possess "huge amounts of cash during elections". 6. According to the petitioner the conduct of the said candidate is also liable to be investigated for violation of Section 8A of the http://www.judis.nic.in

Select target paragraph3

● ● ●

Shanmugam v. India

Judgment

Question Presented: Whether the Election Commission of India may cancel or postpone elections based on the conduct and criminal actions of candidate.

Alleged Acts: Shanmugam, the petitioner in this case, was seeking Parliamentary candidacy came across new reports regarding raids conducted by the Election Commission and the Income Tax Department of the candidates home. The raid were allegedly conducted by a rival political parties and uncovered large amounts of money that was intended to be used for illegally influencing voters. The candidate was also accused of violating Model Code of Conduct for engaging in corrupt practices. The Union of Indian subsequently rescinded the notification of candidacy.

Procedural history: The petitioner brings this case to review the decision of the Election Commission to cancel the election.

Summary: The Election Commission submitted reports indicating that there was an allurement of elector by the political party, candidate, and their accomplices. The court review precedent and determined that bribery constituted an act of corruption under the electoral code. Under art. 324 of the India Constitution, the court determined that the Chief Election Commissioner was able to postpone or cancel the election after taking into account the opinion of experts. Accordingly, when the decision of the Chief Election Commissioner is founded in the opinion of experts, the Court may not substitute its own opinion. There was evidence of malpractice in the electoral system at this juncture and it was necessary to cancel the election in order to maintain its purity. It is not sufficient to prove that the conduct was limited to a single candidate.

Conclusion: The commission was justified in canceling the election.

Legal Issue(s)

Civil Procedure
Electoral Integrity

Applicable Law(s): India Const. art 324.

Region: Asia-Pacific

Country: India

Language of Decision

English

Court: Supreme Court

Election Type: Parliamentary

Date of decision: Apr 17, 2019

Geolocation

Latitude: 28.78511017

Longitude: 77.33957631

: Geolocation

Primary Documents

AC-Shanmugam-and-anr-v-UOI-and-ors-Madras-HC-Vellore-Polls-2019.pdf
English
Download View

Election Judgments - IFES

Select target paragraph3

Shanmugam v. India

Primary Documents

Notifications