Allow Cookies!
By using our website, you agree to the use of cookies
The long since questionable prerequisites for the appointment of ministers was brought to the legal spotlight when the PIL filed by Ashwini Upadahyaya was heard by a bench of five judges in the apex Court of the country. Challenging the current requirements persons must fulfil in order to be eligible as members of the legislature, or the lack thereof, the PIL petitioned to abolish the right to contest elections of persons who have been charge-sheeted. Voicing the views of the prosecutor, Senior Counsel Krishnan Venugopal urged the court for the issuance of directions to political parties in purview of the recommendations listed in the PIL. In order to ensure the enforcement of the orders, the prosecution also suggested the involvement of the Election Commission to ensure that the conditions be airtight. He declared that it is well within the powers bestowed upon the Court to administer such affirmative action.
Representing the interests of the Government, Attorney General K.K Venugopal, who is coincidentally the father of the prosecuting counsel, argued that the grounds for debarment of aspiring representatives are already present in the constitution, and these grounds are protected by the parliament. He added that because of the assumption of innocence until a person is proven guilty, it would be an unfair practice to disqualify persons because of him/her being charge-sheeted.
On the introspective question put forward by Justice Chandrachund, who asked whether a person under trial has the ability to take an oath to uphold the principles of the constitution and the defence answered positively. The Attorney General elucidated the provisions under Article 21 which grants all citizens the right to their own defence. According to the defence, even if the person is guilty, they should still retain the ability to take oath.
The decision of the court is pending.
86540
103860
630
114
59824