Headlines
Why no system to track abnormal rise in poll contestants' assets: SC to Centre
New Delhi, March 12
The Supreme Court on Tuesday directed the Centre to respond to a plea stating that it has failed to put in place a permanent machinery to track the "unnatural increase" in assets of candidates as directed by the top court in February 2018.
The SC bench of Chief Justice Ranjan Gogoi, Justice Deepak Gupta and Justice Sanjiv Khanna also sought response from the Centre on the non-compliance of the top court direction that the non-disclosure of assets and sources of income by a candidate will amount to undue influence within the meaning of Section 123(2) of the Representation of the People Act, 1951.
The SC also asked why the Form 26, which every candidate is required to fill, does not contain a declaration by the candidate that he/she does not suffer from disqualification under any provision of the Representation of the People Act, 1951.
The top court in its February 16, 2018 judgment had said: "In our opinion, such information would certainly be relevant and necessary for a voter to make an appropriate choice at the time of the election whether to vote in favour of a particular candidate."
The court, while not issuing notice on the contempt plea filed by the NGO Lok Prahari, directed the Secretary of the Legislative Department, government of India, to file his reply within two weeks.
The Lok Prahari in its contempt plea contended that the three directions, besides others, issued by the top court on February 16, 2018 have not been complied with.
The SC bench of Chief Justice Ranjan Gogoi, Justice Deepak Gupta and Justice Sanjiv Khanna also sought response from the Centre on the non-compliance of the top court direction that the non-disclosure of assets and sources of income by a candidate will amount to undue influence within the meaning of Section 123(2) of the Representation of the People Act, 1951.
The SC also asked why the Form 26, which every candidate is required to fill, does not contain a declaration by the candidate that he/she does not suffer from disqualification under any provision of the Representation of the People Act, 1951.
The top court in its February 16, 2018 judgment had said: "In our opinion, such information would certainly be relevant and necessary for a voter to make an appropriate choice at the time of the election whether to vote in favour of a particular candidate."
The court, while not issuing notice on the contempt plea filed by the NGO Lok Prahari, directed the Secretary of the Legislative Department, government of India, to file his reply within two weeks.
The Lok Prahari in its contempt plea contended that the three directions, besides others, issued by the top court on February 16, 2018 have not been complied with.
5 hours ago
THE GREEN ALERT- Docu Drama: An appraisal by Experts
5 hours ago
US Senator proposes ending dual citizenship citing "divided loyalties"
5 hours ago
US to strike "very soon" inside Venezuela in action against drug traffickers: Trump
5 hours ago
Trump declares all Biden autopen-signed documents, including pardons "null and void"
5 hours ago
Sexual assault case: Court reserves order on Cong MLA Mamkootathil's anticipatory bail plea
5 hours ago
Yami Gautam says 'good cinema shall win' as she thanks the audience for all the love showered on 'HAQ'
5 hours ago
Michelle Pfeiffer: Moms are unsung heroes of their families
5 hours ago
Armaan Malik says 'trust' shaped the heart of 'Chal Musafir' from 'Gustaakh Ishq'
5 hours ago
Ananya Panday says 'Kartik Aaryan looks out for the film, & not just himself'
5 hours ago
George Clooney says he was ‘annoyed’ losing ‘Thelma & Louise’ role to friend Brad Pitt
5 hours ago
Soha Ali Khan thinks her trainer is confused between strength & survival training
5 hours ago
Actors Aishwarya Rajesh, Thiruveer-starrer titled 'Oh Sukumari'!
5 hours ago
Aamir Khan joins Vir Das for ‘hatke’ film 'Happy Patel: Khatarnak Jasoos’
