Publishing criminal antecedents of election candidates: Supreme Court recalls directions holding BJP guilty of contempt

The Supreme Court on Monday recalled paragraphs of its 2021 judgment that had imposed ₹1 lakh fine on the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) for failing to comply with its directions in relation to the disclosure of details of electoral candidates with criminal backgrounds. [BL Santosh v. Brajesh Singh and ors].A Bench of Justices Dinesh Maheshwari and BR Gavai stated,"It cannot be said that it had been a case of wilful and deliberate attempt on the part of the applicant to disobey or even disregard the judgment of this Court.".The Supreme Court had last month issued notice on the present plea moved by BJP General Secretary BL Santhosh, challenging the Supreme Court order finding the party guilty of contempt of court.The BJP had been fined a sum of ₹1 lakh, after the then bench of Justices Rohinton Fali Nariman (now retired) and BR Gavai noted that the party had published criminal antecedents of its candidates in newspapers of low circulation. This was contrary to the directions of the Court passed in an order dated February 13, 2020.In the 2021 order, the Indian National Congress, the Rashtriya Janata Dal (RJD), the Janata Dal United, the Communist Party of India and the Lok Janshakti Party (LJP) were also fined ₹ 1 lakh, for partial non-compliance.The Communist Party of India (Marxist) [CPI(M)] and the Nationalist Congress Party (NCP) were found to be in total non-compliance and fined ₹ 5 lakh each.The parties had accordingly been found guilty of contempt of the Court's earlier directions in the matter, specifically with respect to the 2021 Bihar Legislative Assembly elections..The paragraphs that stand recalled had found the BJP guilty of contempt, and imposed the fine on the party. In its order, the Court had stated,"...we are of the view that the reason given by the party for failing to submit Form C-7 in respect of one of its candidates is not acceptable and that the party has not provided reasons for selection of its candidates which are in line with our directions. This being the case, the Respondent No. 7 (BJP) is in contempt of the Order dated 13.02.2020."At today's hearing, Amicus Curiae KV Viswanathan argued that no case for review of the Court's 2021 judgment was made out. Justice Gavai then pointed out that contempt has to be deliberate and wilful, to which the Amicus responded that the same yardstick was applied and upheld for the other parties that were held guilty of contempt as well.Justice Maheshwari then remarked,"There are two aspects. One is that satisfactory reasons are not given as to why a candidate with criminal antecedents was preferred, we think that is subjective. Whether that is wilful? For C7 [form], one name was missing but this kind of error is not unknown to us...We are entering into an arena with subjective elements in a decision-making process."Justice Gavai weighed in, saying that it was for Parliament to take a call on whether it wants to debar candidates with criminal antecedents from contesting, and the top court could not restrict such candidates from being fielded at all. "It is not about penalising [the political parties] but the stigma," he added..At the last hearing, the BJP Secretary General's counsel argued that subsequent orders have said that reasons for selection of candidates are not necessary. Once the details are brought to the notice of the electorate, it is for them to decide on how they will vote, it was argued.Advocate Shailesh Madiyal appeared for the petitioner. .[Read order]