Case Overview:
The Supreme Court of India is hearing a petition on whether individuals charged with heinous crimes (e.g., murder, rape) should be barred from contesting elections, or if such a ban could unjustly affect those later acquitted.
Relevance : GS 2(Polity , Judiciary)
Key Arguments:
- Petitioner’s Argument (Ashwini Kumar Upadhyay):
- Right to contest elections is not a fundamental right.
- India’s large population ensures a sufficient pool of honest candidates, so limiting eligibility won’t harm the system.
- Criticized the current electoral system for discouraging honest candidates.
- Court’s Inquiry:
- Justice Surya Kant raised concerns about the irreversible damage to individuals who may be barred from elections but later acquitted.
- Focus on whether a ban on candidates charged with crimes undermines fairness and justice.
- Questioned the feasibility of finding enough “honest” candidates in the current political environment.
2020 Supreme Court Judgment:
- Ordered political parties to disclose the criminal history of candidates for Lok Sabha and Assembly elections, and explain why candidates with criminal charges were selected.
- Aimed to reduce criminal influence in politics by enhancing transparency through publication in newspapers and on social media.
Current Legal Implications:
- The case raises a balance between preventing criminals in politics and protecting individuals’ legal rights if later acquitted.
- The decision could influence candidate selection processes, transparency rules, and electoral reforms.
Next Steps:
- Further hearings scheduled for January 27 to discuss the case in greater detail.
