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.
3 hours ago
Iran's IRGC says more 'devastating' weapons to be used if new war begins
3 hours ago
Meenakshi Seshadri says films have often shown mother-in-law-daughter-in-law relationships in a negative light
3 hours ago
Sam Smith: Madonna is my mother, lauds her support for queer people
3 hours ago
Andrea Jeremiah, Benny Dayal, Karthik to judge first season of 'Tamil Idol'
3 hours ago
AAPI Celebrates India’s 80th Independence Day, Leading the India Day Parade in New York City
3 hours ago
US-North Korea dialogue key first step to halting Pyongyang's nuclear program: South Korea's Unification Ministry
4 hours ago
Formula 1: Max Verstappen pens contract extension with Red Bull till 2030
4 hours ago
Premier League: Arsenal's title defence, new arrivals all you need to know ahead of new season
4 hours ago
Instagram uses 'don't ask, don't tell' approach on under‑13 users' safety: Ex-Meta Engineer in US court
4 hours ago
Mirza Fakhrul Islam Alamgir elected Bangladesh's 23rd President
7 hours ago
CM Vijay calls for united southern strategy on drugs, economy, federal rights
7 hours ago
CM Satheesan’s federalism pitch at zonal council, says Kerala cannot keep bearing burden
9 hours ago
Soori's 'Mandaadi' cleared for release with U/A 16+ certificate
