Seeking votes in the name of religion, caste, race, community or language is illegal, the Supreme Court said on Monday
In a verdict that could have an immediate impact on the upcoming assembly elections in five states and far reaching implications on the way poll campaigns are conducted, the SC said that candidates seeking vote in the name of religion can be penalised under Section 123 (3) of the Representation of People’s Act.
The court said that relationship between man and god is an individual choice and the state is forbidden to owe allegiance to such an activity.
Apart from religion, asking votes in the name of caste, race, community or language has been debarred. The inclusion of language has settled an ambiguity in law that was exploited by the political parties. It was a majority verdict with three dissenting judges, who said that the SC verdict was “judicial redrafting of the law”.
“No government is perfect. The law doesn’t prohibit dialogue or discussion of a matter, which is concern to the voters,” said dissenting judges.
Justices DY Chandrachud, Adarsh Kumar Goel and Uday Umesh Lalit gave the dissenting judgment. Chief Justice Thakur and justices MB Lokur, SA Bobde and LN Rao gave the majority view.
The verdict will have immediate impact on the Uttar Pradesh elections where construction of a Ram Temple in Ayodhya has dominated the political discourse for decades.
Critics allege that voters are influenced on the basis of caste, region and religion in the state.
The SC’s verdict against mixing religion with politics may come in the way of Punjab politicians as well, the other state that is going to polls.
The SC verdict came upon the revisiting of a judgment in 1995, which said Hindutva was Hinduism and called it a “way of life”, holding that the candidate was not violating law by invoking religious texts.
In a verdict that could have an immediate impact on the upcoming assembly elections in five states and far reaching implications on the way poll campaigns are conducted, the SC said that candidates seeking vote in the name of religion can be penalised under Section 123 (3) of the Representation of People’s Act.
The court said that relationship between man and god is an individual choice and the state is forbidden to owe allegiance to such an activity.
Apart from religion, asking votes in the name of caste, race, community or language has been debarred. The inclusion of language has settled an ambiguity in law that was exploited by the political parties. It was a majority verdict with three dissenting judges, who said that the SC verdict was “judicial redrafting of the law”.
“No government is perfect. The law doesn’t prohibit dialogue or discussion of a matter, which is concern to the voters,” said dissenting judges.
Justices DY Chandrachud, Adarsh Kumar Goel and Uday Umesh Lalit gave the dissenting judgment. Chief Justice Thakur and justices MB Lokur, SA Bobde and LN Rao gave the majority view.
The verdict will have immediate impact on the Uttar Pradesh elections where construction of a Ram Temple in Ayodhya has dominated the political discourse for decades.
Critics allege that voters are influenced on the basis of caste, region and religion in the state.
The SC’s verdict against mixing religion with politics may come in the way of Punjab politicians as well, the other state that is going to polls.
The SC verdict came upon the revisiting of a judgment in 1995, which said Hindutva was Hinduism and called it a “way of life”, holding that the candidate was not violating law by invoking religious texts.
Tags:
