http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 1 of 7  

PETITIONER: BHIM SINGH, PRESIDENTJAMMU & KASHMIR PANTHERES PARTY

       Vs.

RESPONDENT: THE ELECTION COMMISSIONER OF INDIA & ANR.

DATE OF JUDGMENT:       04/04/1996

BENCH: RAMASWAMY, K. BENCH: RAMASWAMY, K. BHARUCHA S.P. (J) PARIPOORNAN, K.S.(J)

CITATION:  1996 SCC  (4) 188        JT 1996 (5)   569  1996 SCALE  (3)481

ACT:

HEADNOTE:

JUDGMENT:                          O R D E R      This is  a writ petition for a declaration that Section 30 (d)  of the  Representation of  the People  Act, 1951, is unconstitutional  and   ultra  vires   Article  14   of  the Constitution of  India "as  it does  not specify the maximum period for  holding the  election after  the  withdrawal  of nomination.....",  and  for  a  direction  to  the  Election Commission of  India to  issue a separate notification under Section 30(d)  read with  Section 153 of the Act for holding elections in  the State  of Jammu  & Kashmir  within 20 days from the  date  for  withdrawal  of  nominations.  The  writ petition is filed by one Bhmi Singh, who is the President of a political  party recognized  by the  Election  Commission, namely,  the  Jammu  &  Kashmir  Panthers  Party.  The  writ petition contends  that  the  provisions  on  section  30(d) confer unhridled,  unguided and  uncontrolled power upon the Election Commission to hold polls upon any subsequent to the date of withdrawal of nominations and fixes no terminal date in this  behalf. It  is also  the case  in the writ petition that prospective  candidates in the State of Jammu & Kashmir would have  to obtain personal security from the State for a period of  one month  and 24  days and  this would  be  both difficult and expensive.      Having regard to the obvious urgency, notice was issued on 2nd  April, 1996,  to the Union of India and the Election Commission to  file counter affidavits and the writ petition was posted for hearing on 3rd April, 1996.      On 3rd April, 1996 the Election Commission did not file a counter affidavit but relied upon material on record.      The Union  of India  filed a counter affidavit affirmed by the  joint Secretary  in the Ministry of Home Affairs. It states that  "the Union  of India  shares the sentiments and the concern  expressed by  the petitioner".  It states that, contrary to past practice and to the period of 20 to 25 days

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 2 of 7  

provided for  constituencies outside  the State  of Jammu  & Kashmir in  the  forthcoming  Parliamentary  elections,  the period for  canvassing in  the State  of Jammu & Kashmir is, according  to   the  schedule  laid  down  by  the  Election Commission, 25 days. The affidavit states that "owing to the prevailing peculiar  situation  in  the  state  of  Jammu  & Kashmir, it  is no desirable that the time for canvassing in the  State   should  be  more  than  the  necessary  minimum statutory period, inter-alia, for the following reasons:-      (a) the candidates would require to      obtain personal  security from  the      State for  comparatively  a  longer      period of  25 days  for the polling      on 30.5.96  and  48  days  for  the      polling  on  23.5.96.  This  is  in      contrast  with   the  rest  of  the      country  where  the  period  ranges      from 21 days to 31 days.      (b) It  costs a  great deal  to the      State in  terms  of  resources  and      effort to provide security for such      a long  period to  the  candidates,      their   family    members,    their      election  agents,  their  political      workers etc.  In  this  context  it      would be  relevant to  state  there      that there is a threat from various      militant outfits  from outside  the      country to  including  attempts  at      liquidatire the candidates,      (c)..............................."      The  aforementioned   affidavit   annexes   copies   of correspondence between  the Union  of India and the Election Commission. By  letter dated  25th March, 1996, the Union of India stated:      "4. As  regards the announcement of      Parliamentary Elections  in Jammu &      Kashmir    States,     Commission’s      attention  is   drawn  to   various      queries raised  by the  Ministry of      Home Affairs with the Law Ministry,      as contained  in the  enclosed note      (Annexure,-I).  The   Law  Ministry      have now  advised  us  that  it  is      permissible  to   issue   different      Notifications with  different dates      for  polls  under  Section  further      confirmed   that    the    Election      Commission itself has followed such      practice in the past in the context      of the  third General Elections and      also for Elections to the Tenth Lok      Sabha. As  stated in  the MHA Note,      allowing a  long  gan  between  the      date of  filing nominations and the      date  for  the  poll  is  bound  to      create grave  security  threats  to      the contesting  candidates  and  is      also likely  to  deter  prospective      candidates from  contesting in  the      elections.      5.   At   the    time    of    Home      Secretary’s  presentation   on  the      19th March, the need for staggering      State  polling  dates  in  Jammu  &

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 3 of 7  

    Kashmir State  taking into  account      the requirement  of  para  military      forces, was  discussed  at  length.      The Commission at that time assured      that  in   case  of   such  a  need      arising,   the   Commission   Could      consider revising  the dates of the      poll.  This   matter  account   the      availability  of  security  forces,      the time  required to  mobilize the      forces and other considerations, it      is found  absolutely  essential  to      spread  the   polling  in  Jammu  &      Kashmir State  at  least  on  three      dates as follows :-      Phase-I - Jammu &  Polling on   7th                Parlia-  May (Day 1) ( As                mentary  fixed by EC).                Consti-                tuencies.      Phase-II- Baramulla Polling on Day                Anantnag  I + 14 days                Parlia-                mentary                Consitut-                encies.      Phase-III-Srinagar   Polling on Day                and        II + 7 days                Udhampur                Parliame-                ntary                Constitu-                encies      6.    It  is, therefore,  suggested      that Election Commission may kindly      consider this, and recommend to the      President for the present, to issue      a notification  under Section 14 of      the RP Act, 1951 for the Parliament      elections  in   the  rest   of  the      regards Parliament elections in J&K      State, the Commission may recommend      to the  President, later  on at  an      appropriate time for issuing one or      more       Notifications        for      Parliamentary Elections in Jammuu &      Kashmir  according   to  the  above      Schedule.   The    dates   of   the      Notifications could  be  such  that      the minimum  period for  canvassing      is limited to the prescribed period      of PO days for each constituency."      In its  reply dated  25th  March,  1996,  the  Election Commission said ;      "6. Taking all factors into account      the Commission is agreeable to have      the polls  for Lok  Sabha seats  in      Jammu &  Kashmir,  as  proposed  by      Government of India, namely,      Phase I 4-Ladakh     7th May, 1996             6-Jammu            (Tuesday)      Phase II 1-Baramulla 23rd May, 1996               3-Anantng     (Thursday)      Phase-III2-Srinagar  30th May, 1996               5-Udhampur      (Thursday)

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 4 of 7  

    7.   The Commission  has considered      and  decided   that   it   is   not      necessary    to     make    revised      recommendations  to  the  President      for  the   issue  of  Notifications      under    Section    14    of    the      Representation of  the People  Act,      1951    one    for    Parliamentary      constituencies  in   the  rest   of      Parliamentary constituencies in the      rest of the country and another for      those in J&K, for accommodating the      request of re-scheduling of poll in      the State  of J&k.  The  Commission      under its powers, under Section 153      of the representation of the People      Act, 1951,  is competent  to  issue      and revise  the schedule  of  poll,      without separate  Notifications for      the State  of J&K.  The  Commission      shall  do  so  et  the  appropriate      time.      8.Even while  initially programming      the dates  of poll  in the State of      J&K, the  Commission had considered      the extended  period of compaigning      that would  be entailed  but had so      decided  taking  into  account  the      improvement in the ground situation      in the  State and  the assurance of      the Government of India that law is      conducive to  the holding  of  free      and fair elections in the State.      9.   In the  light of the foregoing      the    Commission    affirms    its      recommendations   made    to    the      President,    vide    its    letter      No.464/96/812 dates  20.3.1996  for      issuing   a    Notification   under      Section 14 of the Representation of      the People  Act, 1951  calling upon      all        the        Parliamentary      constituencies in  the  country  to      elect members  in  accordance  with      the provision of the Representation      of the  People Act,  1951 and Rules      made thereunder."      At the  hearing yesterday the contentions raised in the writ  petition   were  reiterated  on  behalf  of  the  writ petitioner. The  learned Attorney General, appearing for the Union of  India,  strongly  supported  the  writ  petitioner insofar as  he pleaded  that the period of canvassing in the State of  Jammu & Kashmir should not be as large as 55 days. He offered  to  place  before  us  the  latest  intelligence reports to  support  the  plea.  Mr.  G.L.  Sanghi,  learned counsel for  the Election  Commission,  submitted  that  the Election Commission  had reached  its decision  after taking into account  all relevant  factors, including  the need for deployment  of   security  personnel  at  the  time  of  the elections in  the rest  of the  country and  in the State of Jammu &  Kashmir. He  submitted that  if candidates  in that State apprehended  danger to  themselves they  could curtail the period during which they canvassed for themselves.      We were  not impressed by the arguments faintly pressed in regard  to the  constitutionality of  Section 30(d),  for

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 5 of 7  

reasons which we shall presently state.      We were  very concerned  that the Union of India shared the perception  of the writ petitioner about the possibility of grave consequences of an election campaign spread over 55 days in the Srinagar and Udhampur constituencies. The danger to candidates, we realised, would commence upon the day they announced their  candidature and remain until the polls were held,  regardless   of  how   long  each  of  them  actually campaigned. Since the gravity of the situation could only be assessed upon  the basis  of secret  intelligence and  other reports, it  was appropriate,  we thought,  that the date of the poll  be pre-poned. This was something that the Election Commission had  itself appeared to visualize when it said in its letter  dated 25th March, 1996, that it was competent to revise the  date of  the  polls  and  would  do  so  at  the appropriate time.  We thought,  therefore, that  the  matter would be  best resolved  by fresh  discussions  between  the Union of  India and  the Election Commission and we directed accordingly, adjourning the matter to the next day, that is, today.      The Attorney  General  has  today  read  out  to  us  a statement signed  on behalf  of the  Election Commission  of India and the Government of India which reads thus:           "Pursuant   to   the   Supreme      Court’s Order  dated 03.04.1996  in      Writ Petition No.227 of 1996 (Prof.      Bhim Singh  vs. Election Commission      of India  & Others),  officials  of      the  Union     Government  and  the      Election Commission  met on April 3      and April  4, 1996  and  thoroughly      discussed the issue.           There was  agreement that  the      polls in  various constituencies of      J&K should  be held announced by on      7th, 23rd  and 30th  May, 1996,  as      already announced  by the  Election      Commission of  India There was also      agreement that it would have period      to around  the  minimum  prescribed      period    in     such    of     the      constituencies.  The  possibilities      on   reducing   the   period   were      explored and  reviewed. In  view of      the fact  that notifications  under      Section   14    and   30   of   the      Representation of  the People  Act,      1951 have  already been  issued, it      was felt  that under the provisions      of the  Act it  is not  possible at      the present  stage  to  change  the      dates for  filing  of  nominations,      scrutiny   of    nominations    and      withdrawal     of     candidatures.      Therefore, it  was agreed  that  we      should continue  with  the  present      schedule  announced  vide  Election      Commission of  India‘s  Press  Note      dated 25.3.1996."      We are  not a little surprised that the Union of India, after its  statements  in  the  counter  affidavit  and  the submissions on  its behalf at the Bar yesterday, should have agreed as  it has  done.  We  must  assume  that  overnight, according to  the perception  of the  Union  of  India,  the security position in the State of Jammu & Kashmir has vastly

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 6 of 7  

improved and  that the apprehensions that the Union of India had yesterday  have been allayed. We must act upon the basis that the  Union of  India and  the Election  Commission  are fully conscious  of ached  accordingly,  Knowing  full  well where the  blame for  serious adverse consequences, if there should be any, will lie.      Having due  regard to  the ground  realities,  we  must emphasis that  functionaries in  any manner  concerned  with directing the  conduct supervision and control of free, fair and peaceful  elections to  the House  of the People and the Legislative  Assemblies  on  the  States  need  to  adopt  a realistic, pragmatic  and flexible  approach to  ensure that the  country   shall  be  governed  in  its  true,  special, socialist democratic perspective.      In the  light of  the joint  statement of  the Election Commission  and   the  Union   of  India   aforequoted   our intervention would be undalled for. Article 324  of the  Constitution of India vests the conduct of elections  to Parliament  and to the legislature of every State in  the Election Commission. Section 30 of the Act, so far as is relevant, reads thus:      "30.  Appointment   of  dates   for      nominations, etc.   AS  soon as the      notification   calling    upon    a      constituency to  elect a  member or      members  it  issued,  the  Election      Commission shall by notification in      the Official Gazette, appoint-      (a)  the   last  date   for  making      nominations,  which  shall  be  the      seventh  day   after  the  date  of      publication of  the first mentioned      notification or,  if that  day is a      public holiday, the next succeeding      day which is not a public holiday:      (b) the  date for  the scrutiny  of      nominations, which shall be the day      immediately following the last date      for making  nominations or, if that      day is  a public  holiday, the next      succeeding  day   which  is  net  a      public holiday:      (c) the  date or  dates on  which a      poll shall  if necessary, be taken,      which or  the first  of which shall      be a  date  not  earlier  than  the      twentieth day  after the  last date      for the withdrawal of candidatures;      and      (e)  the   date  before  which  the      election shall be completed.      xxx            xxx              xxx      Section 14 states that a general election shall be held for the purpose of constituting a new House of the People on the expiration  of the  duration of the existing House or on its dissolution. Sub-section (2) of Section 14 reads thus:      "(2)  For   the  said  purpose  the      President shall,  by  one  or  more      notifications  published   in   the      Gazette of  India on  such date  or      dates as  may be recommended by the      Election Commission,  call upon all      parliamentary   constituencies   to      elect members  in  accordance  with      the provision  of this  Act and  of

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 7 of 7  

    the   rules    and   orders    made      thereunder:      There can be little doubt that the aforesaid provisions read together  require close  consultation between the Union of India and the Election Commission in the matter of fixing the election  programme. It  is clearly  both impossible and undesirable that any outer limit should be placed in Section 30(d) for  the date of the poll. The fixation of the date of the poll  would depend  upon a variety of circumstances, all of which  have to  be taken  into account  by  the  Election Commission acting  in consultation  with the  Government  of India, which  would have  the  necessary  material  in  this behalf. We  do not, therefore, find Section 30 (d) arbitrary or unconstitutional.      The writ petition is disposed of accordingly.      There shall be no order as to costs.