[BREAKING] Supreme Court fines 8 political parties for non-disclosure of criminal antecedents of candidates in Bihar Assembly Elections

The Supreme Court on Tuesday imposed fines on eight political parties for failing to comply with the top court's directions in relation to disclosure of details of candidates with criminal backgrounds on their official websites as well as in newspapers and on social media in the Bihar Assembly Elections (Brajesh Singh v. Sunil Arora)..While 6 parties, BJP, Congress, Rashtriya Janta Dal (RJD), Janata Dal United, CPI and Lok Jan Shakti Party were fined Rs 1 lakh for partial non-compliance, two parties, Communist Party of India (Marxist) and Nationalist Congress Party (NCP) were found to be in total non-compliance and were fined Rs. 5 lakh each. ."We direct the Respondent Nos. 3,4,5,6,7 and 11 to deposit an amount of INR 1 Lakh each in the account created by the ECI as specified in this judgment in paragraph 73(iii) within a period of 8 weeks from the date of this judgment. Insofar as Respondent Nos. 8 and 9 are concerned, since they have not at all complied with the directions issued by this Court, we direct them to deposit an amount of INR 5 Lakh each in the aforesaid account within the aforesaid period," the Court ordered.A Bench of Justices Rohinton Fali Nariman and BR Gavai delivered judgment on contempt petitions filed by Brajesh Singh and Manish Kumar, who alleged that the Court’s earlier directions passed on February 13, 2020, were not complied with by political parties during the Bihar Assembly Elections.Senior Advocate KV Viswanathan served as Amicus Curiae in the case.The following are the findings by the Court against the 8 political parties:Janata Dal United (₹ 1 lakh fine)The petitioner submitted that the reasons given by the party for the nomination of a candidate from the Belaganj Assembly were inadequate and not in consonance with the Supreme Court's February 2020 order.The Amicus Curiae in his report said that the party filed Form C1 and C2, which specifies the format for publication of criminal antecedents of candidates by the candidates and political parties respectively in newspapers, in a vague and mechanical manner. Nobody appeared on behalf of Janata Dal United (JDU) to counter the allegations."The Respondent No. 3 (JDU) has not entered appearance or filed any counter affidavit to controvert this fact as on date of this Order. This being the case, we are of the view that the Respondent No. 3 is in contempt of the Order dated 13.02.2020 for failing to follow the directions of this Court in letter and spirit," the Court ordered..Rashtriya Janta Dal (₹ 1 lakh fine)The petitioner and Amicus Curiae pointed out that the party specifically provided ‘winnability’ as the only reason for selection of its candidates as against those without criminal antecedents.This, the Court said, is in the teeth of its directions and would amount to contempt of court. .Lok Janshankti PartyThe petitioner contended that identical reasons for nomination of 5 candidates and further that the publications were not made in the format prescribed. Further, it was pointed out that the party published the details in newspapers which are of low circulation in derogation of the Court's order.The Court accepted the same stating,"It is undisputed that the party has given identical reasons for selection of 5 of its candidates and has also filled Form C2 in a mechanical manner.".Indian National Congress (₹ 1 lakh fine)The petitioner pointed out that criminal antecedents were published in newspapers which are of low circulation and that the forms in which details of criminal antecedents have to be published have been filled in a mechanical manner. The Amicus Curiae said party has given reasons along the lines of ‘winnability’ for the selection of candidates that have been accused of serious offences such as Section 307, Indian Penal Code and Section 506, Indian Penal Code.The Court said that the party has not complied with the directions of the Bench in letter and spirit and is liable for contempt of court. BJP (₹ 1 lakh fine)The petitioner contended that criminal antecedents were published in newspapers which are of low circulation and that the forms in which details of criminal antecedents have to be published have been filled in a mechanical manner.The Amicus Curiae pointed out that the party provided reasons for selection of candidates, by referring to serious offences such as offences under Section 386 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 506 of the Indian Penal Code and portraying them as cases that were of a trivial nature."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," the Court ruled holding the party guilty of contempt of court. Communist Party of India (Marxist) [₹5 lakh fine]The Election Commission pointed out that the party is one of the two parties that has not submitted the Form C7 or C8 for any of its candidates and therefore is fully non-compliant with top court's February 2020 order.Senior Advocate PV Surendranath, appearing on behalf of CPI(M) submitted that the election process for the State of Bihar was coordinated by the State Committee of the party and that Form C7 and C8 were not submitted due to oversight on part of the State Committee. He further submitted that the party has attempted to comply with the directions of this Court insofar as declaration of information regarding criminal cases in newspapers and the website of the party is concerned and that the aforementioned act of non-compliance should be viewed as an isolated incident and its unconditional apology be accepted.The Court, however, refused stating that oversight on part of the State Committee of the party cannot be a ground for non-compliance of the directions passed by the Court. Nationalist Congress Party (₹5 lakh fine)Like CPI(M), NCP also failed to submit the Form C7 and C8 for all its candidates. The party submitted that its State committee was dissolved few months prior to the election and that was the reason for non-compliance. The Court, however, declined to accept the same and held it to be guilty of contempt of court.Communist Party of India (₹ 1 lakh fine)The petitioner pointed out that criminal antecedents of candidates were published in newspapers of low circulation and that the forms in which details of criminal antecedents have to be published were filled in a mechanical manner.The Amicus Curiae pointed out that the party, in order to flout our directions, justified selection of some candidates who have been accused of serious offences such as offences under Section 307, Indian Penal Code and Section 506, Indian Penal Code by stating that the cases “do not have any substance”.The Court concurred stating that the party has not followed the directions in letter and spirit. [Read Judgment]