@LiveLawIndia: Delhi High Court to shortly he...

Delhi High Court to shortly hear PIL to disqualify Arvind Kejriwal, Manish Sisodia and Durgesh Pathak from contesting elections over their refusal to participate in proceedings before Justice Swarana Kanta in the excise policy case and for scandalising her on social media.

The matter will be heard by a division bench comprising Chief Justice Devendra Kumar Upadhyaya and Justice Tejas Karia.

The plea has been filed by one Satish Kumar Aggarwal. He also seeks that ECI must de-register the Aam Aadmi Party.

Hearing commences.

Counsel for Petitioner: The judgment of single judge, press conferences held by respondents, what is this judgment. Whole effort of respondents is to scandalise the single judge and judicial system.

Court: You are asking us to direct ECI to deregister a party. Please take us to the section.

Is there any provision for de registration of a political party? If there is then what is statutory scheme for registration and deregistration: Court

Counsel responds that there is no provision in RP Act.

Counsel refers to a SC judgment saying that cancellation of registration can be ordered.

Court: First take us to judgment where circumstances are mentioned.

Counsel reading relevant paras of the judgment. He says circumstances are where party plays fraud or where party is declared unlawful by Government or any other law.

Court: First two situations matter doesn’t matter, you are taking aid of third ground- political party is declared unlawful. Whether this party has been declared as unlawful?

Counsel now refers to Section 29A (5) of the Representation of Peoples Act.

Counsel: This provision is mandatory requirement. If anyone violates it, this matter will fall.

Where is that power? Court asks.

Counsel: I have brought on record judgment of single judge.

Counsel: That is the basis of this petition.

That will be seen later. First establish that ECI can deregister a party. Your matter do not fall anywhere. Nowhere it falls: Court

Counsel refers to a provision in RP Act.

None of the conditions are here. No intimation, no amendment in the Constitution. What is the like ground? Court asks.

Counsel refers to Article 84C.

Counsel: Bearing true faith to the constitution is one of qualifications of member of a political party and who stands for election. If he does not have faith in constitution, he cant contest elections.

Court: How will it result in deregistration of party?

Court says individual members disqualify themselves and that the counsel has to distinguish between individual members and the party.

Court: Confine yourself to legal issue. If somebody has sandalize the court or proceedings, appropriate remedy is under contempt of court act. If someone is punished under the contempt of court act, will he be disqualified from elections?

Counsel: If political leaders are indulging in such acts, the party and the leaders have to be punished and therefore de registeration.

The moment criminal revision filed by CBI, those people came in court.

Court: Judgment is to be read in context of revision petition of CBI. Nothing beyond this. Pursuant to that, proceedings taken up, consequences will be borne by individuals.

Conduct of party is important: Counsel

Court: Where is the provision?

Counsel: It is expected that one has to follow constitutional principles.

Court says persons facing contempt proceedings will face the burnt of proceedings. How will that impact disqualification to contest elections or deregistration of political party? Court says.

Justice Karia: There is contempt proceedings which is sub judice. Other prayers are premature. Your grievance is satisfied.

Court: Who is for UOI?

Counsel for Union Government refers to judgment referred by petitioner (Indian National Congress (I) Vs. Institute of Social Welfare (2002).

Counsel for ECI: Please see the prayer.

We have seen: Court

Court dictates order: Heard petitioner counsel, counsel for Union of India and ECI. Jurisdiction-of this court under Art 226 has been sought to be invoked in public interest by instituting proceedings of this petition with following prayers.

Perusal of prayers reveals that a direction is sought to ECI to deregister AAP a political party for violation of RP Act provisions. The petitioner has sought to disqualify private respondents from contesting elections: Court

Court: Petitioner counsel submits that in terms of Sec 29A of RP Act, any application made by an association seeking registration as political party has to accompany copy of rules and regulations of association and the same shall entail provision that the body shall bear true faith to the constitution of india and to secularism and democracy.

Court: He states that in view of judgment dated April 20, in criminal revision petition (of CBI), since there are observations made in respect of conduct of respondents, who are members of party, the party has disqualified itself to continue to be registered for violation of provisions of RP Act.

Court: In respect of other prayer where it is sought that ECI should declare the respondents as disqualified from contesting elections, reliance is placed on Article 84c of constitution of india.

Court: Having heard the parties, we are of the opinion that the petition is highly misconceived. Registration of political parties and matters connected thereto are governed by part 4 of RP Act. Sec 29A of the Act provides for registration of body or associations with ECI according to which if any such party and intending to avail itself to part 4A of Act, would have to apply for registration for the purposes of RP Act.

Court refers to Sec 29A (2), (3) and (5) of RP Act.