The Election Commission told the Supreme Court on Monday that a person against whom charges have been framed in a criminal case should be barred from contesting polls as he ceases to have requisite excellence and integrity for public office.
“It is stated that where a person has been accused of serious criminal charges and where the court is prima facie satisfied about his involvement in the crime and consequently charges have been framed against such person, then in such cases, keeping such person out of the electoral arena would constitute a reasonable restriction for serving the larger public interest,” the EC said in its affidavit to the apex court. “At this juncture, the integrity and character of the accused is under scrutiny and he ceases to have requisite excellence and integrity to be considered as a candidate for a high public office involved in the administration of the country,” it said.
A bench headed by Justice R.M. Lodha directed the Centre to file its response to the EC’s affidavit within two weeks.
Appearing before a bench headed by Justice R.M. Lodha, advocate Meenaxhi Arora, appearing for the commission, said the doctrine that a person is presumed innocent until proven guilty should not be applied to the right of a person to contest election. “It is pertinent to note that the framing of a charge against an accused is done after the allegations and evidence have undergone judicial scrutiny and application of judicial mind by a competent court. Thus, only after judicial notice has been taken of the charges against the accused and the court finds that a prima facie case exist against the accused, charge is framed,” she said.
The apex court, however, expressed apprehension of such provisions being misused and also said that lengthy legal process between framing of charges and final disposal of case cannot be lost sight of. “The objective is to bring purity in election. We also have to take care that process is not misused. We want to ensure that criminals do not enter legislative bodies but it has to be done by legislation,” the bench said.