Facts in Brief

The petition raised the question before the Supreme Court: Whether, before casting votes, voters have a right to know relevant particulars of their candidates? In short, the Court was to consider “whether or not an elector, a citizen of the country, has a fundamental right to receive information regarding the criminal activities of a candidate to the Lok Sabha or Legislative Assembly, for making an estimate for himself as to whether the person contesting the election has a background making him worthy of his vote, by peeping into the past of the candidate.”

This contention was raised by the Association of Democratic Reforms, firstly before the Delhi High Court, basing their argument on: (a) the Report of the Vohra Committee of the Government of India, Ministry of Home Affairs; and (b) the 170th Law Commission Report. The Delhi High Court held that “for making a right choice, it is essential that the past of the candidate should not be kept in the dark, as it is not in the interest of democracy and the well-being of the country.”

Aggrieved by this decision, the Union of India appealed to the Supreme Court, wherein it was submitted that till suitable amendments were made in the Representation of the People Act and the Rules thereunder, the High Court should not have given any direction to the Election Commission.

Judgment

The Supreme Court directed the Election Commission to call for information from each candidate seeking election to Parliament or a State Legislature, as a necessary part of his nomination paper, furnishing therein information on the following aspects in relation to his or her candidature:

• Whether the candidate is convicted, acquitted or discharged of any criminal offence in the past, if any, and whether he was punished with imprisonment or fine.
• Prior to six months of filing of nomination, whether the candidate is accused in any pending case, of any offence punishable with imprisonment for two years or more, and in which charge is framed or cognizance is taken by a Court of law. If so, the details thereof.
• The assets (immovable, movable, bank balances, etc.) of a candidate, and of his or her spouse and dependants.
• Liabilities, if any, particularly whether there are any overdues of any public financial institution or Government dues.
• The educational qualifications of the candidate.

For the Common Man

This judgment has entitled every citizen to know the full particulars of the candidate who is to represent him, as a fundamental right. Such practices bring about transparency in governance, and also allow the voter to exercise his right to vote judiciously.