tu tkx`fr dy;k.k lalfkk Xokfy;j

Transcription

1 jft- ua- id- tu tkx`fr dy;k.k lalfkk Xokfy;j dk;kzy;&781] dsyk'k k fogkj dkwyksuh] flvh lsavj] Xokfy;j e-iz iz- & laj{kd fot; ckck ¼c`tfd'kksj 'kekz½ eks jktdqekj <+iys eks v'kksd 'kekz eks fxjh'k 'kekz v/;{k eks vrqy mik/;k; mik/;{k eks Jherh euh kk 'kekz lfpo eks euh k nqcs dks kk/;{k eks fou; 'kekz la;qdr lfpo eks izeksn dq'kokg lnl; eks vktkn dq'kokg lnl; eks Ø fnukad izfr] jftlvmz fo k;& lu~ 1981 esa *gkfk* pquko fpug iznku dj o kz 1981 ls vkt rd Hkkjrh; lafo/kku ds vuqpnsn 14,oa vkn kz pquko lafgrk] yksd izfrfuf/k vf/kfu;e dh /kkjk 131] fuokzpu izrhd vkj{k.k vksj vkoavu vkns k 1968¼2½?k] dk myya?ku dj 87 djksm+ ernkrkvksa dh laos/kkfud vf/kdkjksa dk guu djus,oa xqtjkr] dukzvd] fgekpy izns k esa gksus okys fo/kku lhkk pquko dh vf/klwpuk ds iwoz fuokzpu fpug *gkfk* fujlr dj u;k fpug vkcafvr djus ckcr~a lanhkz & fnukad ls gj ekg gtkjkas vkosnu gkfk fuokzpu fpug dks lekir djus gsrq Hkkjr fuokzpu vk;ksx lfgr lhkh lafo/kkfud vf/kdkfj;ksa dks ns k ds ernkrkvksa }kjk lafo/kkfud vf/kdkjksa dh j{kk gsrq fn;s x;s ijarq Hkkjr fuokzpu vk;ksx }kjk mu yk[kksa vkosnuksa dks lkjghu ckrdj fujlr dj fn;ka 87 djksm+ ernkrkvksa ds lafo/kkfud vf/kdkjksa ds laj{k.k,oa tkx:drk gsrq tu tkx`fr dy;k.k lalfkk }kjk fnukad ls xzke lgnksjk ls fnyyh rd dh in;k=ka uksv & fnukad dks mijksdr vkosnu ls lacaf/kr vr;ar egroiw.kz nlrkostksa dk Hkkx izfke ds 2000 ist yksdfgr esa lkoztfud fd;s tk;saxs,oa Hkkx&2 fnyyh igqapus ij egkefge jk Vªzifr] mijk Vªifr] iz/kkuea=h dks Kkiu ds lkfk fn;s tk;saxsa egksn;] 1- ;gfd] Hkkjr fuokzpu vk;ksx }kjk o kz 1981 esa bafm;u us kuy daxzsl ikvhz dks fuokzpu fpug *gkfk* vkcafvr fd;ka mijksdr le; ij vu; jktuhfrd ikfvz;ksa,oa lkekftd dk;zdrkz }kjk bl fuokzpu fpug dks ysdj vkifrr;ka dh xbza 2- ;gfd] pquko fpug ds :i esa *gkfk* pquko fpug fn;k x;k tks uslfxzd U;k; ds fl)karksa ds foijhr gksdj Hkkjrh; lafo/kku ds vuqpnsn 14 dk myya?ku tcfd vkn kz vkpkj pquko lafgrk ds vuqlkj ernku dsunz ls 200 ehvj dh ijhf/k esa ernkrk }kjk dksbz Hkh fuokzpu izrhd lkfk esa ugh ys tk;k tk ldrka o kz 1989 esa cgqtu lektoknh ikvhz dks Hkh fuokzpu fpug gkfkh vkacfvr fd;k x;k FkkA mijksdr le; ls gh Xokfy;j flfkr kkldh; inek fo/kky; Xokfy;j esa tks LFkkuh; fudk; uxj ikfydk] fo/kku lhkk] yksd lhkk esa fuokzpu dsunz ds :i esa mi;ksx fd;k tkrk rc ls gh kkldh; inek fo/kky; ifjlj esa o kksz iwoz ls gh LFkkfir gkfkh dh ewfrz dks tks cgqtu lektoknh ikvhz dk fuokzpu izrhd gksus ds dkj.k mls dim+s ls izr;sd pquko esa <d fn;k tkrk gs D;ksafd mijksdr gkfkhz dh ewfrz ernku dsunz ls 200 ehvj dh ijhf/k esa gksus ds dkj.k <d fn;k tkrk gsaa 3- ;gfd] Hkkjrh; lafo/kku ds vuqpnsn 14 dk fof/k ds le{k lekurk dk guu o kz 1981 ls lg fu;ksftr o lqlaxfb r gksdj ;kstukc) :i ls Hkkjrh; ukxfjdksa ds laos/kkfud vf/kdkjksa dk guu dj 87 djksm+ ernkrkvks ds lkfk fuokzpu vk;ksx }kjk fof/k ds le{k lekurk ds vf/kdkj dk myya?ku fd;k tk jgk gsaa Hkkjr fuokzpu vk;ksx dks iznrr vf/kdkj o kfdr;ksa dk ;qfdr laos/kkfud o fof/kd vf/kdkjks ds uke ij ernkrkvksa ds lkfk euekuk o HksnHkkoiw.kZ O;ogkj dj jktusfrd ncko esa jktusfrd LokFkZ gsrq ernkrkvksa ds laos/kkfud vf/kdkjksa dk kks k.k dj Hkkjrh; yksdrkaf=d izfø;k lq/kkj ds uke ij Hkkjr fuokzpu vk;ksx }kjk nq:i;ksx dj i{kikriw.kz O;ogkj dj iznrr laos?kkfud nkf;roksa dh vogsyuk dj vuqpnsn 14 dh xyr O;k[;k dj 86]86]13070 ernkrkvksa ds laos/kkfud vf/kdkjksa ls f[kyokm+ fd;k tk jgk o kz 2017 esa Hkkjr fuokzpu vk;ksx }kjk tkjh dh xbz fofhkuu jkt;ksa dh ernkrk lwph

2 Name of Sate/UT Grand Total 1. Andhra Pradesh Arunachal Pradesh Assam Bihar Chhattisgarh Goa Gujarat Haryana Himachal Pradesh Jammu & Kashmir Jharkhand Karnataka Kerala Madhya Pradesh Maharashtra Manipur Meghalaya Mizoram Nagaland Odisha Punjab Rajasthan Sikkim Tamil Nadu Telangana Tripura Uttar Pradesh Uttarakhand West Bengal A & N Islands Chandigarh D & N Haveli Daman & Diu Delhi UT Lakshadweep Puducherry TOTAL ;gfd] Hkkjr fuokzpu vk;ksx }kjk Hkkjrh; ernkrvksa ds vf/kdkjksa dh j{kk djuk mudk ije drzo; gs ijarq muds }kjk i{kikr o euekuk O;ogkj dj lafo/kku ds vuqpnsn 14 ¼d½ dk myya?ku fd;k tk jgk bafm;u us kuy dkaxsl ikvhz dks fuokzpu izrhd@pquko fpug ds :i esa izfke fpug csayksa dh tksm+h] f}rh; fuokzpu fpug xk; cnm+k],oa fnukad dks iatk pquko fpug vkcafvr fd;k x;ka ekuo kjhj dk lcls vf/kd egroiw.kz,oa laosnu khy vax gkfk gksrk ftls pquko fpug ds :i esa izrhd ugha ekuk tk ldrk vkn kz pquko lafgrk ds vuqlkj ernku dsunz ls 200 ehvj dh ijhf/k esa fdlh Hkh ernkrk }kjk vius lkfk fuokzpu fpug ys tkuk izfrcaf/kr gksrk gs ijarq ernkrk nks gkfk ysdj ernku dsunz es aizos k djrk ernku dsunz ij yach drkjsa yxh jgrh gs ftlls dkqh le; yxrk gs bafm;u us kuy dkaxzsl ikvhz ds ernkrk o ernku dsunz ij miflfkr LFkkuh; dk;zdrkz tks ernkrkvksa dh igpkus gsrq ikvhz }kjk fcbk;sa tkrs gs ds }kjk gkfk dks fgykdj ladsr ds :i esa mi;ksx djrs gsaa 2- ;gfd] bafm;u us kuy dkaxzsl ikvhz }kjk jk Vªh; /ot dk mi;ksx ikvhz /ot ds :i esa] inksz ds :i esa] >afm;k cukus ds fy;s,oa xys esa Mkyus okys lkqh ds :i esa fd;k tk jgk gsa Hkkjrh; lafo/kku ds vuqpnsn 14 ds vuqlkj Hkkjr ds izr;sd ukxfjd dk ;g drzo; gs fd og lafo/kku dk ikyu djs mlds vkn kksz] lalfkkvksa] jk Vªh; /ot] jk Vªh; xku dk vknj djsa ijarq jk Vªh; dkaxzsl ikvhz }kjk jk Vªh; /ot esa mls pø gvkdj mlds LFkku ij iatk Nkidj jktusfrd LokFkZ ds fy;s jk Vªh; /ot dk foøhr :i cukdj lokztfud :i ls ikvhz izpkj izlkj ikvhz /ot,oa ltkov ds fy;s fd;k tk jgk bl izdkj lfu;ksftr o lqlaxfbr gksdj jk Vªh; /ot ds leeku dks vk?kkr igqapkdj vijkf/kd d`r; dj 125 djksm+ Hkkjrh; ukxfjdksa dh jk Vªh; Hkkoukvksa ds lkfk f[kyokm+ dj laos/kkfud vf/kdkjksa ds uke ij jktusfrd ikvhz;ksa }kjk kfdr dk nq:i;ksx dj yksdrkaf=d izfø;k dks nwf kr dj 2

3 Hkkjrh; ukxfjdksa ds uslfxzd U;k; dds fl)karksa dk myya?ku dj fof/k ds le{k lekurk dk guu fd;k tk jgk ;fn mdr laca/k esa dksbz Bksl fu.kz; ugha fy;k x;k rks vkus okys le; esa jk Vªh; /ot esa pø ds LFkku ij >km+w fuokpzu izrhd Nik gksxka 3- ;gfd] Jherh euh kk kekz,moksdsv Xokfy;j }kjk fnukad dks Hksts x;s vius i= dk tckc Hkkjr fuokzpu vk;ksx ds izeksn dqekj kekz }kjk fnukad dks fn;k x;ka ftlds vuqlkj &^^Ban on the Use of Indian National Congress Flag and to freeze its symbol Hand Regarding. Your letter receied in the Commission on on the subject cited above and to inform that Party flags are not allotted by the Commission. Regarding the flag of Indian National Congress, your attention in invited to the Order dated of the Hon ble Supreme Court in SLP No. 6195/2004 (B. Krishna Bhatt Vs. UOI and Ors.). In this connection, it is also informed that if any party or individual commits offence under the Prevention of Insults of National Honour Act, 1971, there are penal provisions under the said Act and recourse can be had accordingly. Further, it is informed that the symbol Hand has been the reserved symbol of the Indian National Congress for almost three decades. It was an election symbol even before it was allotted to Indian National Congrees, just because Hand is a part of the human body, it is not sufficient enough reason to object to it as being used inside the polling station. There are several other election symbols which represent articles of daily use found in or around the polling stations, such as ceiling fan, Table, Chair, Stool, inkpot& Pen, cup & sauccer and key etc. If any symbol is misused inside the polling station for soliciting votes, there are provisions to deal with such offences. In view of the position explained above, the reliefs claimed by you cannot be granted. 4- ;gfd] fuokzpu vk;ksx ds Jh vkj-ds- JhokLro izhfaliy lsøsvjh m-iz- jkt; y[kuå dks fy[ks x;s i= fnukad i= Øekad 464@;w-ih-&,y-,@2012@198&199 vkwmzj ds vuqlkj vkns k fn;k fd& Petitions were filed before the Election Commission in 2009 by Shri Ravi Kant and Shri Sukumar, Advocates, the Common Cause and t he Rashtra Nirman, praying, inter alia, for frezzing of the symbol Elephant allotted to the Bahujan Samj party, on the ground that the statues of elephant and the statues of Ms Mayawati, the President of the Party put up at the expense of the Government, in various public places in different plarts of the State jeopardized the concept of free and fair election. The Commissiion, in its order dated 11 th October 2010, while holding that the reliefs claimed in the petitions where not capable of being granted at that time, observed: However, at the time of elections, the Commission would, no doubt, take appropriate steps and measures to see that the statues of Ms. Mayawati and BSP s symbol elephant do not disturb the level playing field and give undue advantage to BSP vis-a-vis other political partices. The said order dated 11 th October 2010, was also placed before the Hon ble Supreme Court, in connection with Writ Petition (Civil) No. 266 of 2009 (Ravi Kant and anr Vs State of Uttar pradesh and other). The Commission has announced the schedule of general election to the Legislative Assembly of Uttar Pradesh on 24 th December, At the time of the general election to the House of the People in 2009, the Commission had issued instruction, vide is letter No /INST/2008-CC&BE, dated 28 th March, 2009, to the effect that no photograph of the Prime Minister, Chief Minister, Ministers and other political functionaries should be displayed in any government /public beilding. In its subsequent circular letter dated 1 st April 2009, the Commission clarified that the underlying intention of the instructions in the letter of 28 th March, 2009 was that the images of the political functionaries, who have deep influence on the minds of the electrons and many of whom are still active in public life should not be displayed in government buildings and premises as that would have the effect of distributing the level playing field vis-a-vis the political functionaries of other parties and candidates. It was made clear that while the photographs of Prime Minister, Chief Minister, Ministers and other political functionaries should not be displayed, the instructions did not apply with regard to images of national leaders, poets, and prominent historical personalities of the past, and the President of Indiaand the Governors. Pertinent to add here that the abovementioned writ petition before the Hon ble Supreme Court was filed by Shri Ravi kant in the wake of the instructions of the Commission in its letter dated 28 th March, 2009 and 1 st April The Commission, after taking all the aspects of the matter into consideration, and considering the need to ensure level playing field for all political parties and candidates in the interest of free and fair election, has directed that each and every statue of elephant and each and every statue of Ms Mayawati, constructed/erected in pulic places in the State of Uttar Pradesh, at the government expense, which were the subject matter of the abovementioned writ petition No. 266 of 2009 before the Hon ble Supreme Court, shall be suitably covered so as to ensure that these statues do not influence the minds of the electrons distrinuting the level playing field during the current general election to the Uttar Pradesh Legislative Assembly. The expense for covering the statues will be borne by the local authorities under whose jurisdiction the various statues have been erected. The whole work of veiling the statues shall be completed by 5PM on 11 th January The District Election Officer of the Districts concerned shall submit to the Commission a compliance report in this regard by 7PM on 11 th January By Order R.K. Shrivastava Principal Secrerary. Hkkjr fuokzpu vk;ksx ds fn;s x;s vkns k ds }kjk phq lsøsvjh xozuesav vkwq mrrjizns k y[kuå dks tkjh dj fnukad ds lka; 5 cts rd leiw.kz gkffk;ksa dh ewfrz;ks adks <dus ds vkns k fn;sa 5- ;gfd] Hkkjr fuokzpu vk;ksx ds rhu lnl;ksa }kjk ikfjr fu.kz; fnukad Before the Election Commission of India Coram : H.S. Brahma Dr. S.Y. Quraishi V S Sampath 3

4 Election Commissioner of India Chief Election Commissioner of India Election Commissioner of India In re : Petitions seeking freezing of the symbol Elephant allotted as the reserved symbol of Bahujan Samaj Party, a National Party The Bahujan Samaj Party (hereinafter referred to as The BSP) in a recognized national party under the provisions of the Election Symbols (Reservation and allotment) Order, 1968 (for short Symbols Order ) having the election symbol Elephant reserved for it in all States and Union Territories except in the State of Assam. In June- July 2009, The Election Commission received three petitions raising the issue that statues of Elephant (reserved symbol of BSP) and Ms. Mayawati (President of that party and Chief Minister of Uttar Pradesh) have been installed in various places, including public parks, in Uttar Pradesh at Government expense, and praying for freezing of the symbol Elephant as the reserved symbol of the BSP. These petitions were from (i) Shri Atul Kumar Singh, Secretary General of an organization named Rashtra Nirman, (ii) Shri Kamal Kant Jaswal, Director, Common Cause, and (iii) Shri Ravi Kant and Sukumar, Advocates. 2.In their petition dated 15 th July, 2009, S/ Sh. Ravi Kant and Sukumar, Advocates, stated that the statues of Elephant and Ms. Mayawati were installed in public places in Lucknow and Noida, with the money spent from the State Exchequer. They stated that the Lucknow Development Authority and NOIDA Authority provided this information to them in reply to applications under the Right to Information Act. The reliefs claims in the petitions of S/Sh. Ravi Kant and Sukumar are as follows : (a) The elections symbol of BSP may be frozen and the party granted another symbol; (b) Ms. Mayawati may be disqualified from contesting elections as her several statues will always remain to continue to create an unequal playing ground for her opponents during elections and thus violate the very concept of free and fair elections ; (c) Sincethis jeopardizes the concept of free and fair elections, the Election Commission should call an allparty meeting to arrive at consensus on the above subject. 3. Similar relief for canceling the allotment of reserved symbol Elephant to the BSP has been claimed in the petitions of Shri Kamal Kant Jaswal and Shri Atul Kumar Singh. 4. In the petitions of Shri Ravi Kant and Shri Jaswal, they have referred to the Commission s instructions in its letters No. 437/6/INST/2008-CC & BE dated and issued before the General Election to the House of the People, 2009 directing, inter alia that Photographs and images of the political functionaries, who have deep influence on the minds of electors and many of whom are still active in public life and may even be contesting the current general election, should not be displayed in the government buildings and premises. 5. Shri Ravi Kant had earlier filed a writ petition (WP No. 266/09) before the Hon ble Supreme Court challenging the misuse of public money for construction of the said statues. The reliefs claimed in the petition before the Hon ble Supreme Court were:- (i) To issue an appropriate writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the respondent (State of Uttar Pradesh) to stop the further construction and expenditure of public funds for building and installing statues of the incumbent Chief Minister and party symbol of Bahujan Samaj Party in public land; (ii) To issue an appropriate writ, order or direction in the nature of Mandamus directing the respondent to remove the statues of the incumbent Chief Minister and the party symbol of Bahujan Samaj Party from Public land; (iii) To issue direction directing the CBI to investigate the misuse of public funds; (iv) To issue direction directing the Bahujan Samaj Party and the Chief Minister to Compensate the state exchequer for the misuse of public money by them; 6. The Commission vide its letter 3 rd August, 2009 asked for the comments of the BSP on the three petitions submitted before it. The BSP submitted its reply (dated 12 th August, 2009) making mainly the following submissions: (a) The petitioners (Sh. Ravi Kant and others) have also filed a Writ Petition (Civil (PIL) No. 266 of 2009 in the Supreme Court raising the same allegations. Therefore, the present petition deserves to be dismissed and in any case deserves to be deferred till the decision of the Courtwas pronounced. (b) The statues of elephants installed are not the replica of the party symbol as alleged. The election symbol of the party shows the elephant with its trunk lowered whereas the statues in question show the elephants with trunk raised in a welcome posture. (c) Statues of elephants in welcome posture are found in many public places, historical places, temples, etc. (d) The installation of statues of Ms. Mayawati are as per the will/ desire of (late) Shri Kanshi Ram, founder of the party, that statues of Ms. Mayawati should also be installed wherever his statues are erected. (e) The Indian National Congress has named many programmes, projects and institutions after their leaders that have also distorted the level playing field in the electoral arena. The party is also propagating its symbol hand. 7. The reply of the BSP was sent to the petitioners for their comments vide the Commission s letter dated In response, Shri Ravi Kant and Shri Kamal Kant Jaswal filed their rejoinders. 8. Shri Ravi Kant in his rejoinder made the following submissions : 4

5 (i) Their petition before the Commission relates to the directives concerning the conduct of free and fair elections whereas their petition before the Supreme Court was against misuse of public money and violation of Article 14 of the Constitution. (ii) The reply of BSP has not addressed their main plea before the commission that alleged construction of statues violates the Commission s guidelines dated with regard to conduct of free and fair elections. (iii) The alleged constructions are not memorials because of the presence of statues of the incumbent Chief Minister and further the installation of statues of elephant in such a vast magnitude by the State Government ruled by BSP makes the intention very clear that it is for glorification and publicity of election symbol of the ruling party and its leader. (iv) The examples of historical places, temples cited in the reply of BSP were whimsical and incorrect inasmuch as neither the temples nor the historical structures had been built by public money of the tax payers. 9. Shri Kamal Kant Jaswal in his rejoinder stated as follows : (i) The image of an elephant, whether with its trunk raised or lowered, is evocative of the reserved symbol of elephant allotted to the BSP. Moreover, there are some monuments erected by the BSP s Govt. Where the statues of elephants have their trunks lowered, for example- the memorial opposite Sector16- A in Noida. (ii) The contention in his petition is that the installation of statues of the chief Minister and of the party symbol at public places and at state expense have the effect of permanently disturbing the level playing field vis-à-vis other parties. There could have been no objection had the BSP honoured the will of Late Shri Kanshi Ram by installing the statues at its own premises and on its own expense. (iii) The parallel drawn in the reply with the symbol of the Congress Party is totally misplaced. If the Congress Govt. were to erect a stand alone image of a hand, then the objection raised in his application would have applied to such an installation with equal force. (iv) He is in agreement with the view that the practice of naming state funded programmes and institutions after political personalities is highly objectionable. 10. In the meanwhile, Shri Ravi Kant also filed an I.A. before the Supreme Court in the pending writ petition in which he inter alia sought direction against the State of U.P. not to announce public opening of the statutes and not to spend public money on the glorification of the party symbol. In its interim Order dated , the Hon ble Supreme Court directed as follows : As regards the alleged installation of election symbols of Bahujan Samaj Party, the petitioners have moved the Election Commission for certain reliefs. The petitioners have also made similar relief for removal of installation of these symbols from the public places. The Election Commission would be at liberty to pass appropriate orders in the petition filed by the petitioner(s) herein at the earliest at least within a period of three months. As regards maintainability of the writ petition, list the matter after 8 weeks. 11. The Commission fixed a hearing in the matter on 11 th March, 2010; but it was postponed first to 29 th March, 2010 and then to 7 th April, 2010, at the requests of the BSP. 12. The BSP meanwhile filed a supplementary written statement on , inter alia, making the following submissions: (i) The matter has already been raised before the Supreme Court and the petitioner cannot initiate parallel proceedings before another forum. (ii) The construction of statues is action taken by the State Government for implementing the decision of the State Legislature. Political party cannot be penalized for actions of the Government. (iii) The earlier Government under the INC, and the coalition Govt. of BJP, BSP had also built statues of elephants in UP. (iv) The jurisdiction of the Commission to Superintend, direct and control elections becomes operative during the elections only and as such the Commission has nothing to do with the day to day functioning of the government in a state during non- election period. 13. The Commission heard the matter on as scheduled. Shri Ravi Kant and Shri Jaswal, the petitioners appeared in person. The Respondent (Bahujan Samaj Party) was represented by Shri Satish Cahndra Mishra. Both the petitioners and the respondent reiterated their submissions made earlier. 14. In the meantime, in order to get a more comprehensive and complete picture the Commission addressed the State Govt. of Uttar Pradesh on 3 rd March, 2010 to furnish the following details: (i) In how many parks/ public place (with details of names, location of parks etc.) statues of elephant and statues of Ms. Mayawati have been erected/ installed as alleged in the application. (ii) How many such statues have been constructed in each public place/ park. (iii) The approximate cost of erection/ installation of each statue. (iv) Photographs and video recordings of such statues. 15. It was requested that the above information may be furnished to the Commission by the State Government by 8 th March, Initially, the State Government vide its letter dated 5 th March, 2010, informed that the information was being collected from the department concerned but later on the state Government vide its letters dated 19 th March, 2010 and 3 rd April, 2010, refused to furnish the information asked for on 5

6 the ground that the Commission has no jurisdiction to seek such information either under the Constitution or under the Representation of the People Act, More details of correspondence on this subject with the State Government have been given hereinafter in a subsequent portion of this Order. 16. Being dissatisfied with the stand of the State Government of Uttar Pradesh in relation to the jurisdiction of the Commission in the matter, and being of the view that the desired information was needed for passing appropriate order in the petitions before it, the Commission filed an Application before the Supreme Court seeking direction to the Govt. of Uttar Pradesh to supply the information called by the Commission. The Commission also sought extension of time- limit for passing the Order on the petitions before the Commission. 17. The Supreme Court in its order dated 9 th July, 2010 directed as under Pursuant to order dated 22 nd February, 2010, we make it clear that the Election Commission will give its decision on the Preliminary point concerning maintainability of the complaint dated 15 th July, 2009, relating to symbols and statues. We are informed that the matter has been argued threadbare on the aspect of maintainability on 7 th April, If, on the question of maintainability, the Election Commission wants further hearing, notice may be given. However, the decision shall be given by the Election Commission within a period of three months. Place the writ petition on receipt of the decision of the Election Commission. 18. Thereupon, the Commission asked the petitioners and the respondent (Bahujan Samaj Party) vide its letter dated 2 nd August, 2010 to submit further documents, if any, on the question f maintainability of the petitions by 17tyh August, 2010.Shri Shail Kumar Dwivedi, on behalf of the BSP and Shri Ravi Kant, the petitioner furnished their replies more or less reiterating the submissions made earlier by them. 19. The Commission then further heard the matter on 24 th September, Shri Ravi Kant and Shri Kamal Kant Jaswal, the petitioners appeared in person. On behalf of the BSP, Shri Satish Chandra Mishra, Senior Advocate, appeared along with Shri Shail Kumar Dwivedi Advocate, Shri Ambeth Rajan, Shri Sasi, Shri Parthiban and Shri Ravi Saini. 20. Shri Ravi Kant submitted that the BSP had admitted the fact of construction of statues of Ms. Mayawati and statues of elephants, at the expense of public exchequer. He stated that the statues of elephants installed in temples are symbolic, whereas the intention behind installing large number of statues of elephants in the present case in clearly to draw political mileage for the Party. According to him, it is unheard of that the State Government installs statues of a living political leader, its incumbent Chief Minister, at the expense of the public exchequer, whereby ruling party gets undue political advantage out of this. 21. The petitioner Sh. Ravi Kant also submitted photographs of two statues of Ms. Mayawati installed in Gautam Budh University in Greater Noida and reiterated his submission that the permanent statues of elephant being installed would be violation of model code of conduct at the time of election which is sufficient ground to freeze the symbol elephant allotted to the BSP. In support of his contention that the petition is maintainable he made the following further submissions before the Commissions: (i) With the commencement of bye- election from 83 Malihabad (SC) assembly constituency in the State of Uttar Pradesh on 16 th July, 2010, the Model Code of conduct was in operation from to in the district Luchnow. The statues will result in violation of the Model Code of Conduct for all time to come at the time of elections. (ii) The alleged construction of statues of party symbol and incumbent Chief Minister is an offence of a new kind which has no mention in the Representation of the People, Act, 1951 and Symbols order and such new surprise situations can be dealt with by the Commission in exercise of its inherent powers under Article 324, as held by the Supreme Courtof India in M.S. Gill Vs Chief Election Commissioner (AIR 1978 Supreme Court 851) and A.C. Jose V Sivan Pillai (AIR 1984 SC 921). (iii) If such massive structures and statues benefiting a single political party in power in a state is allowed by the Election Commission it will open the gates for huge memorials and millions of statues of politicians and election symbols to be built across the country with thousand of crores of public funds being spent. The ramifications of allowing such statues and memorials of the incumbent Chief Minister is dangerous for the democracy and conduct of free and fair elections. (iv) The Commission should use its plenary powers in Article 324 (1) in the instant case before it. 22. Shri Jaswal submitted that installation of permanent statues of the living leader of the BSP and statues of elephant, the reserved election symbol of the party, in public places was a clear violation of the Commission s instructions in its circular letter No. 437/6/INST/2008-CC & BE, dated , prohibiting display of pictures of political leaders in government premises during election period. He stated that installing of these statues amounted to misuse of governmental authority that would permanently disturb level playing field infavour of the BSP and its candidates Vis-A Vis other Parties and Candidates. Shri Jaswal submitted that if the statues had been installed at private places on private expense, it would not have been objectionable; but, the present case was just the opposite. Regarding the contention made by the BSP in its reply about elephant statue having been built long back in the Hathi Park in Lucknow, Shri Jaswal submitted that elephant was not election symbol at that point of time. Winding up his arguments, Shri Jaswal submitted that the emerging trend of misusing public money for 6

7 political game has to be dealt with firmly. Shri Jaswal added that he would welcome any action to curb the naming the schemes after political leaders. 23. Shri Satish Chandra Mishra, appearing for the BSP, made the following submissions, mainly reiterating his earlier submissions in his reply dated 12 th August, 2009 and supplementary reply dated 29 th March, 2010: (i) Shri Ravi Kant filed a writ petition before the Supreme Court raising the issue of the statues, in June, In July, 2009 he filed the petition before the commission on the same issue. Multi- forum proceedings on connected issues amount to forum- hunting and is not permissible. The petition before the Commission should, therefore be disposed of an not maintainable. (ii) The relief claimed for disqualification of Ms. Mayawati from contesting election is totally frivolous. The Commission has to function within the limits of the powers vested in it under the law. There is no provision of law enabling the Commission to disqualify a person on the ground given in the petition of Shri RaviKant. (iii) The instructions contained in the Commission s circular letter no. 437/6/INST/2008-CC & BE dated , are not applicable at this point of time when there is no election. Alleged violation of the instructions cannot create rights and obligations unknown to the election law. (iv) Model code of conduct applies only during the period of election. (v) The elephant has special significance and place in the Indian tradition and history. The Commission s decision allotting the symbol to the BSP was a conscious decision fully knowing the significance of elephant symbol. (vi) The statue of elephant is found in several public places and buildings including the parliament House. Even the Indian currency notes have the elephant printed on it. (vii) The statues in question are not the replica, as alleged, of the BSP symbol. The trunk of the elephants in the statues is raised in welcome posture whereas the trunk of the election symbol elephant is lowered. The election symbol of BSP has nothing to do with the statues of elephants installed by the government or its agencies. (viii) The petitions before the commission do not make out any case of violation of the Model Code of Conduct or any lawful direction of the Commission at a time when election was notified in the State. Hence, the petitions are not maintainable. There is no direction or order issued by the Commission regarding construction of statues of political leaders or replica of a political party s election symbol, which may be taken as having been violated in this case. (ix) There are several government schemes and programmes named after leaders of Indian National Congress which would also influence the electors. (x) No violation of any statutory or fundamental rights of the petitioners have been pleaded in the complaints. (xi) The statues, monuments are just symbolic and the electorate is not influenced in any manner by such statues. The result of the Lok Sabha election in 2009 from Lucknow parliamentary Constituency which went against the BSP disproves the claim of petitioners that the statue of elephants, and the Chief Minister or any other leader would be creating an uneven ground for other candidates. (xii) There was no cause of action to file the complaint. Hence, the complaint were liable to be rejected under Order 7 Rule 11 CPC read with Section 87 of the Representation of the People Act. Illusory cause of action cannot be taken cognizance of. (xiii) The Commission has taken the view that in matters related to governmental issues, during no election period, the commission has no jurisdiction to interfere, as is evedent from its letters dated 18 th March, 2010 and 5 th April, 2010 to Shri Manoj Agnihotiri and Shri Surya Prakash raising the issue of naming of various government schemes and programmes after the political leaders. (xiv) The decision to install the statues of elephants and statues of Ms. Mayawati was taken by the State Legislature to honour the wish of the electorate, and the State Government implemented this decision. The budget for installation of these statues has been approved by the State Legislature. The Government and political party are two different entities. The BSP as a political party had no role to play in installing the statues referred to in the petitions. The Commission or Court has no power of judicial review or scrutiny of expenditure incurred by the Government pursuant to Appropriation Act passed by the State Legislature. (xv) The Commission will not have jurisdiction in exercise of its power under Article 324 of the Constitution of India to go into the issue as to whether action of the Government is not wise or that the extent of expenditure is not for the good of the State. All such questions must be debated and decided in the legislature and not before the election commission. 24. On conclusion of the hearing the Commission permitted the petitioners and the BSP to submit written synopsis of their arguments, if they so desired, within one week. Only the BSP filed its written synopsis. 25. The question that needs to be determined first by the Commission in terms of the Hon ble Supreme Court s direction dated 9 th July 2010, is whether the petition dated 15 th July, 2009 of Shri Ravi Kant and others seeking, inter alia, freezing of the symbol elephant of BSP and allotting another symbol on the grounds mentioned therein is maintainable before the Commission. 7

8 26. The Commission has considered the contentions of the petitioners and the submissions made on behalf of the BSP. For determining the question of maintainability of the abovementioned petition of Shri Ravi Kant and others and the petitions of Shri Kamal Kant Jaswal and others, the Commission has to look into the reliefs sought and prayers made therein. 27. One of the reliefs prayed for by Shri Ravi Kant in his petition is that Ms. Mayawati may be disqualified from contesting elections for the alleged misused of Govt. funds for installing her statues, in addition to his prayer for freezing the election symbol elephant of the BSP. As regards this prayer for disqualification of Ms. Mayawati it is to be noted that grounds for disqualification for being chosen as, and for being, a Member of Parliament and State Legislature have been expressly laid down in the Constitution (Articles 102 and 191) and in the Representation of the People Act, 1951 (Sections 8, 8A, 9, 9A, 10 and 10A). The grounds pleaded in the petition of Shri Ravi Kant seeking disqualification of Ms. Mayawati do not within the ambit of any of the disqualifications laid down in the law. The Commission cannot add or lay down any new grounds for disqualification. Therefore the prayer for disqualification of Ms. Mayawati for the reasons given in the petition is not tenable, and the same has to be rejected. 28. Another relief prayed for is that the statues of elephant and Ms. Mayawati jeopardize the concept of free and fair elections and the Commission should call an all party meeting to arrive at a consensus on the subject. Hardly anything needs to be said with regard to this prayer, as the Commission itself would be able to take appropriate decision if it feels that the concept of free and fair elections has been jeopardized by the above statues and there is no need to call for an all party meeting for arriving at any consensus, as prayed for. 29. The only other prayer made by the petitioners is that the symbol elephant of BSP may be frozen and another symbol may be allotted to the party. For considering this prayer, what needs to be seen is whether the petitioners have made out a case justifying the Commission s intervention. The reference to freezing here obviously means withdrawing the symbol elephant from the BSP and allotting an alternative symbol to the party, so that the party does not get an undue advantage of its symbol which is stated to have been propagated at the State cost. As has been held by the Hon ble Supreme Court in the case of Subramanian Swamy Vs. Election Commission of India 2008 (14) SCC 318 symbols are reserved for political parties on their recognition as National or State parties. Recognition of political parties as National or State Parties and allotment and reservation of election symbols to them is governed by the provisions of the Election Symbols (Reservation and Allotment) Order, 1968, as amended from time to time. The BSP, as already stated, is presently a recognized National Party under the said Symbols order, and the symbol elephant is reserved for it in all States and UTs except in Assam. Allotment and reservation of symbol to a recognized political party or withdrawal of such allotment or reservation has to be traceable to specific provisions under the said symbols order. Grant of recognition to a party which entitles it to a reserved symbol under the Symbols order is dependent on the poll performance of the party in terms of the percentage of votes polled and the number of seats won as per the criteria laid down in paragraphs-6a and 6Bof the symbols order. One contingency that can result in withdrawal of recognition and the consequent withdrawal of the reserved symbol is the failure of the party to come up with the poll performance as required under the said paragraphs. It is nobody s case that the BSP has failed in its poll performance to measure upto the prescribed standards for continued recognition as a National Party. 30. The other provision dealing with withdrawal or suspension of recognition and consequent withdrawal of reserved symbol in the case of a recognized political party is laid down in paragraph 16 A of the symbols order. The said paragraph is reproduced below for case of reference 16A. Power of Commission to suspend or withdraw recognition of a recognized political party for its failure to observe Model Code of Conduct or follow lawful directions and instructions of the Commission Notwithstanding anything in this order, if the Commission is satisfied on information in its possession that a political party, recognized either as a National Party or as a State Party under the provisions of this Order, has failed or has refused or is refusing or has shown or is showing defiance by its conduct or otherwise (a) to observe the provisions of the Model Code of Conduct for Guidance of Political Parties and Candidates as issued by the Commission in January, 1991 or as amended by it from time to time, or (b) to follow or carry out the lawful directions and instructions of the Commission given from time to time with a view to furthering the conduct of free, fair and peaceful elections or safeguarding the interests of the general public and the electorate in particular, the Commission may, after taking into account all the available facts and circumstances of the case and after giving the party reasonable opportunity of showing cause in relation to the action proposed to be taken against it, either suspend, subject to such terms as the Commission may deem appropriate or withdraw the recognition of such party as the National Party or as the case may be the State Party. 31. Thus, the factors that can lead to withdrawal or suspension of recognition and consequent withdrawal or freezing of the symbol of a recognized party under the Symbols order are attributable either to the poll performance of the Party or its conduct and actions amounting to violations of the Model Code of Conduct or any lawful directions or instructions issued by the Commission. As already noted above, it is no one s case that the BSP has failed to fulfill the conditions laid down in paras 6A or 6B of the symbols order for its continued recognition as a National Party. In so far as the question of violation of any lawful 8

9 direction or instruction of the Commission is concerned, the petitioners have not pointed out any direction or instruction of the Commission which the BSP is alleged to have violated within the meaning of para 16 A of the symbols order. 32. The question that now remains to be considered is whether any provision of the Model Code of Conduct has been violated in the erection and installation of statues of elephant and Ms. Mayawati. It is well settled that the Model Code of Conduct comes into play when the Election Commission announces any schedule for an election and it ceases to be effective on the completion of election by the declaration of the result. Shri Ravi Kant took the plea at the hearing on 14 th September, 2010 that they had filed the petition under reference before the Commission on 15 th July, 2009 and that the Commission announced certain bye- elections, including a bye election from 83- Malihabad Assembly constituency in Lucknow district, on 16 th July, He thus contended that their petition should be deemed to have been filed before the Commission when the Model Code of Conduct was in force. This is obviously an after thought, as this plea was not taken either in their original petition or in any of their rejoinders and it was only on 24 th September, 2010 that such a plea was advanced for the first time by Shri Ravi Kant. In any event, it is not the case of the petitioners that the erection or installation of statues of elephant and Ms. Mayawati commenced after 16 th July, 2009 when the Model Code of Conduct became effective in relation to the abovementioned bye election. In their petition dated 15 th July, 2009 itself, the petitioners have given some instances of certain statues having already been installed in Lucknow and Noida. 33. Notwithstanding the above, the question is whether the Model Code of Conduct can be said to be attracted in the matter of erection and installation of the abovementioned statues of elephant and Ms. Mayawati. The symbol elephant has been allotted to, and reserved for, the BSP by the Commission under the provisions of the symbols order. Every party has the right to propagate its symbol by erection of statues of the symbol and also of its leaders. But is hardly needs to be stressed that such propagation of the party s symbol should be undertaken by the party by spending its own funds and resources and should not undertake such propagation by misusing its official position being the ruling party in the State, and using public funds for the purpose. The Model code of conduct provides, inter alia that The Party in power whether at the Centre or in the State or States concerned, shall ensure that no cause is given for any complaint that it has used its official position for the purposes of its election campaign. Propagating a party s symbol is the main object of the party s election campaign. But if a party, whether ruling or in the opposition by misusing public funds for its own partisan ends, erects or installs statues of its party symbol, even during non election period, the party cannot absolve itself of the accusation that it has acted in beach of salutary principles underlying the objects of the Model Code of Conduct- may be not in letter but undoubtedly in spirit. 34. The petitions of Shri Ravi Kant and others are mainly based on two communications, dated 28 th March, 2009 and 1 st April, 2009 of the Commission. In the context of the general election to the Lok Sabha 2009, the Commission by its letter dated 28 th March 2009 instructed that the photographs and images of the political functionaries, who have deep influence on the minds of electors and many of whom are still active in public life and may even be contesting the current general elections, should not be displayed in the government buildings and premises as that would have the effect of disturbing the level playing field vis-à-vis political functionaries of other parties and candidates. Subsequently the Commission vide its letter dated 01 st April 2009 clarified that while the photographs of Prime Minister Chief Minister, Ministers and other political functionaries should not be displayed, the above instruction, however, is not applicable with regard to the images of national leaders poets, and prominent historical personalities of the past, and the President of India and the Governors. If it is felt that even the display of photographs of leaders of a political party which go on changing from time to time in the confines of government officers, etc can vitiate the level playing field, a permanent statute of a living leader and the symbol of the party will undoubtedly result in the said vitiation of the level playing field. 35. Further, if the display of a photograph inside an office room can have the effect of vitiating the level field the installation of a permanent statute which is visible at all times to every person passing through that public place can be said to have more vitiating effect on the mind of the electorate. It is not in dispute that all the statues under reference have been erected and installed at the public places which are visited and frequented by the public at large more or less on daily basis. The photographs of leaders may be removed during the election period, but what would happen to such statues of symbols and leaders permanently erected and installed at the public places which are visited and frequented by the public at large more or less on daily basis. The photographs of leaders may be removed during the election period, but what would happen to such statues of symbols and leaders permanently erected and installed in public places during the election period. This may amount to disturbing the level playing field almost on daily basis and not merely during the election period. 36. To counter the above allegations the plea of the party is that the statues of elephant are not the replica of the party s symbol elephant as the statues of elephant installed have their trunks raised upwards in welcome posture whereas the trunk of elephant in the party s symbol is lowered downwards. This plea hardly carries any weight. When a common man sees the statue of an elephant, he sees an elephant in it and that would remind him of the symbol elephant of BSP. The trunk of elephant being raised upwards or 9

10 lowered downwards would hardly be a distinguishing feature in the mind of a common elector. The slogans coined by the BSP soliciting votes for it in its election compaign are : Mohar Lagao Haathi Par Button Dabao Haathi Par. In these slogans there is no appeal that the vote should be cast for elephant with the trunk lowered the appeal simplicitor is to vote for the symbol elephant. Here it may also be relevant to point out that when the question of reservation of symbol for the BSP on all India basis arose on its gaining the status of National Party in 1996, the party insisted for reservation of the symbol elephant and did not agree for any modification by addition of Howda or Mahout as the party pleaded that it is identified with the symbol elephant simplicitor. Will there be no objection to the allotment of a symbol elephant with trunk raised in welcome posture to some other party if so asked for by any other political party, on the ground that the two symbols are different or distinct from each other? 37. But the undisputed fact is that the statues in question have been installed by the State Government at the State expense. This is accepted both by the petitioners and by the BSP. The question for determination now boils down to is whether this act of the State Government should invite action against the BSP, as sought in the petitions. In the written and oral submissions made on behalf of the BSP, the main plank of the defence of BSP is that the statues of elephant and leaders of BSP have been erected by the State Government and not by the party. In the erection of such statues, the State Government has acted with the specific sanction of the State Legislature and the expenditure on these statues has been duly approved by the State Legislature by passing valid appropriation Acts. The BSP contends that the Commission cannot, therefore, go into the question of installation of these statues, and the expenditure incurred thereon, by the State Government. Reliance in support of the above contention has been placed on the decisions of the Hon ble Supreme Court in Ram Jawaya Kapoor Vs State of Punjab [1955 (2) SCR 225] and Bhim Singh Vs Union of India 2010 (5) SCC 538 to the effect that Judicial interference is permissible when the action of the government is unconstitutional and not when such action is not wise or that the extent of expenditure is not for the good of the State. We are of the view that all such questions must be debated and decided in the legislature and not in court. It was contended that when even the Apex Court of the land cannot go into the propriety or otherwise of any government action or expenditure a fortiori, the commission cannot sit in judgment over the decisions taken by the State Legislature and the Executive act performed by the State Government in pursuance of such decisions of the State Legislature. 38. The Commission sees quite a force in the above contention of the BSP and it cannot be lightly brushed aside. The question whether the BSP has misused its position as the ruling party in getting the statutes of Ms. Mayawati and elephant installed with public funds during the non election period, is not for the Commission to go into. It is common knowledge that Shri Ravi Kant and several others have already approached the Hon ble Supreme Court and Hon ble Allahabad High Court with their grievances to that effect. The Hon ble Courtsare examining those matters and decisions rendered by them would be binding on all authorities. 39. It will be observed from the above that the facts regarding construction of the statues by the State Government are not in any dispute. However, the extent of the constructions is not clear although Shri Ravi Kant submitted some details based on the information he was able to obtain from the State Government under the RTI Act. As mentioned earlier, the Commission desired to get the correct and complete picture so as to see that appropriate orders could be passed or appropriate measures taken, if any, to redress the grievance of the petitioners. With that end in view, the Commission wrote to the State Government of Uttar Pradesh to furnish details regarding the number of statues installed in various places in the State on government expense, and the total expenditure incurred in connection therewith. In its first letter dated 3 rd March 2010, to the State Government, while referring to the petitions filed before the Commission, the Commission requested the State Government to furnish by 8 th March, 2010 the above information, including the photographs and video- recording of such statues. Initially the State Government vide its letter dated 5 th March 2010 informed that the information was being collected from the departments concerned, and that they needed 15 days more time to furnish the information. The commission then informed the State Govt. that the information be furnished by 23 rd March Later the State Govt. vide their letter dated 19 th March 2010 instead of furnishing the information asked for, stated that no exact replica of the design of election symbol Elephant had been constructed by the Govt. from their budget as mentioned in the complaint. In so far as construction of statues of Ms. Mayawati was concerned, the letter stated that the reference to the statues of Ms Mayawati was made only as a passing statement in the complaint of Shri Ravi Kant and no specific complaint was madeon that ground. The commission vide itsletter dated 23 rd March, 2010 again wrote to the State Govt. to furnish by 3 rd April 2010factual information regarding the number of all statues of elephants and Ms Mayawati installed at public/ private places from Govt. funds between 2007 and 2010 and photographs and video recordings of such statues. However, the State Government this time took the position that the Commission had no jurisdiction to seek such information. The Chief secretary to the State Government, in his letter dated 3 rd April 2010 state that neither in Article 324 of the Constitution nor in the Representation of the People Act, 1951 is there an provision empowering the Commission to seek such information from the State Govt. curiously the issue of jurisdiction was raised after the State government has initially sought additional time to furnish the desired information/ video recordings. It is apparent that the State Govt. Did not wish 10

11 to give details of the matter, for reasons known to it. It is incongruous that a constitutional authority should choose to deny basic factual information of the nature sought in the present case, which can be accessed even by a common citizen under the right to information act, to another constitutional authority to enable the latter to have the benefit of full and correct factual information to decide petitions filed before it. The commission wrote back to the State Government on 21 st April 2010 that the commission had been expressly given liberty by the Hon ble Supreme Court to pass appropriate orders in the petitions filed by the petitioners at the earliest and it was in the context of the above direction of the Apex Court that the Commission considered it necessary and relevant to obtain factual information from the State Government on the issues raised in the petitions before it for passing appropriate orders thereon. The facts on which information has been sought were the facts within the special knowledge of the State Government and it was but fair and in accordance with the principles of natural justice that the requisite information should have been given by the State Government. In the Commission s view, instead of assisting the Commission in arriving at the just and fair conclusion and enabling it to pass appropriate orders on the basis of all relevant facts as directed by the Hon ble Supreme Court, the State Government raised the issue of the Commission s jurisdiction and refused to furnish the basic factual information sought. The Commission wrote to the State Government expressing its disagreement with the State Government s view with regard to the Commission\s jurisdiction and stated that the stand taken by the State Government was thwarting the just and fair process of ascertaining the fact by the Commission for passing appropriate orders as directed by the Hon ble Supreme Court. Yet, the state Government did not give any information as asked for by the Commission. 40. Pertinent to mention here that the BSP, in its supplementary written statement filed on also took a similar stand that there was no legal obligation on the State Govt. to furnish information to the Election Commission regarding the installation of statues. This was inconsistent with the stand taken by the party that the State Govt. and political party are different entities and by raising this objection, the party apparently obliterated any distinction between the government and the party. 41. The BSP has contended that the jurisdiction of the Commission to superintend, direct and control elections becomes operative during the elections only and it has nothing to do with the day-to-day functioning of the government in a State during non election period. The Commission is a little surprised at the above contention of the BSP. Under Article 324 of the Constitution, the Commission has been vested with the superintendence, direction and control of, inter alia, preparation of electoral rolls and conduct of elections to both Houses of Parliament and State Legislatures. The activities relating to above functions of the Commission under the Constitution go on throughout the year and are not confined only to the election period, as contended by the BSP. For instance, the electoral rolls have to be revised before the elections and remain in the state of continuous updation throughout the year even during non election period. Polling stations are identified and lists thereof are revised from time to time, not during the election period alone, but much before the actual process of elections. Again the polling staff has to be identified and trained during the non- election period. Election materials have to be procered and the electronic voting machines checked for their fool proof functioning, well before the elections. Election records have to be safely preserved after the elections are over. It is the State machinery which is involved in all these day-to-day activities. Further, it is common knowledge that election symbols are allotted to, and reserved for, recognized political parties during the non election period. All disputes relating to such allotment and reservation of election symbols of recognized political parties which the Commission has to adjudicate under the symbols order also arise substantially during the non election period. Thus, for adjudicating a dispute relating to an election symbol of a party, it is not a condition precedent that the election process should be on and the model code of conduct in force. 42. Be that as it may, the position emerging from the facts and circumstances narrated above it that the Commission is in the dark as to the places where the statues, particularly of the party s symbol elephant, have been installed and what is the numberof such statues installed in different places in Uttar Pradesh. The petitioners have stated that some statues of elephant and Ms Mayawati have been installed in Lucknow and Noida. But at the last hearing on 24 th September, 2010, Shri Ravi Kant alleged that some such statues have been further installed in Gautam Budh Nagar District also. As mentioned above, the State government has refused to furnish even the basic information as to where and how many of these statues have been erected and installed. In fact, the Commission even does not know whether all the elephant statues which have been installed with public funds have their trunks raised in welcome posture, as averred by BSP, or lowered downwards. Shri Kamal Kant Jaswal pointed out that some statues installed in some part of Noida have even their trunks loweed downwards as in BSP s symbol elephant. Thus on the facts available to the Commission and the records adduced by the parties the Commission is not in a position to guage the impact of the above statues, and the extent of such impact, on the minds of the electros. It has to be borne in mind that the BSP is a National party and the symbol elephant is reserved for it in the whole of the country, except Assam. Before taking any decision with regard to the withdrawal of the above symbol from the party, as prayed for by the petitioners, the Commission has to carefully weigh the implications which such withdrawal of symbol may have and cause confusion in the minds of millions of electors apart from members, supporters and workers of the party, across the 11

12 country, who identify the party with its symbol elephant on account of some action taken by one of the State Governments. 43. In view of the above and taking into account the totality of the facts and circumstances available to the commission, the relief prayed for by Shri Ravi Kant and others in their petitions under reference are not capable of being granted on the grounds urged therein and thus the said petitions are not maintainable. 44. However, at the time of elections the Commission would, no doubt, take appropriate steps and measures to see that the statutes of Ms. Mayawati and BSP s symbol elephant s do not disturb the level playing field and give undue advantage to BSP vis-à-vis other political parties. 45. These steps and measures would, however, be subject to any directions that may be passed by the Hon ble Supreme Court or Hon ble Allahabad High Court in the matters pending before them. H.S. Brahma Election Commissioner of India Dr. S.Y. Quraishi Chief Election Commissioner of India New Delhi 11 th October, 2010 mijksdr vkns k ij ls jfodkar }kjk Hkkjr fuokzpu vk;ksx dks fnukad dks i= fy[kdj mijksdr vkns k dh vuqikyuk gsrq dgk x;k FkkA ftl ij ls Hkkjr fuokzpu vk;ksx ds vkj- ds- JhokLro }kjk fnukad dks funsz k fn;s fd fnukad dks kk;a 5 cts rd mrrjizns k dh gkfkh dh ewfrz;ksa dks <d fn;k tkosaa 6- ;gfd] izkfkhz }kjk fnukad dks lfpo Hkkjr fuokzpu vk;ksx ubz fnyyh dks,d lwpuk i= Hkstk FkkA ftlds in Øekad 1 o 2 esa bafm;u us kuy dkaxzsl ikvhz ds pquko fpug gkfk,oa jk Vªh; /ot esa gkfk Nkius ds laca/k esa fy[kk x;k in Øekad 3 esa ys[k fd;k x;k gs fd vkn kz pquko lafgrk ds vuqlkj 100 ehvj dh ijhf/k esa ernkrk dksbz Hkh fuokzpu fpug lkfk esa ysdj ugha tk ldrk iajrq bafm;u us kuy dkaxzsl ikvhz ds pquko fpug gkfk dks ysdj ernku dsunz esa izso k djrk gs vksj mijksdr gkfk ls bzoh,e e khu dk cvu nckrk gs vksj miflfkr ernku dsunz esa dezpkfj;ksa }kjk mlds gkfk dh maxyh esa L;kgh yxkbz tkrh bafm;u us kuy dkaxzsl ikvhz ds ernkrk ernku dsunz esa ladsr ds :i esa gkfk fgykdj yksdrkaf=d izfø;k dks nwf kr djrs mijksdr vkosnu ds in Øekad 4 esa myys[k fd;k x;k gs fd ekuuh; iwoz eq[; pquko vk;qdr MkW- ;kdwc dqjs kh }kjk cgqtu lektoknh ikvhz dks vkacfvr pquko fpug gkfkh,oa ek;korh o dk khjke dh ewfrz;ksa dks <dokus dk vkns k o kz 2012 esa fn;k FkkA tcfd mijksdr ewfrz;ka tks fuokzpu vk;ksx ds funsz ku ij leiw.kz mrrj izns k esa <dokbz xbz FkhA ftudh nwjh ernku dsunz ls 1 ls ysdj 15 fdyksehvj rd FkhA 80 izfr kr ewfrz;ka ikdksz esa Fkh ftugsa ifuu;ksa o dim+s ls <dok;k x;k FkkA mijksdr ewfrz;ksa dks <dokus gsrq fuokzpu vk;ksx }kjk Hkkjrh; lafo/kku ds vuqpnsn 14 dh kfdr;ksa dk gokyk nsrs gq;s mijksdr ewfrz;ka <dokus dk vkns k fnukad dks tkjh fd;k x;k fd fnukad rd kke ds 5 cts rd leiw.kz mrrjizns k esa LFkkfir gkfkhz dh ewfrz;ksa dks <d fn;k tk;sa mijksdr fuokzpu vk;ksx ds vkns k ij rrdky ;q) Lrj ij lhkh ftyksa dh ftyk fuokzpu vf/kdkjh }kjk dkfjr fd;k x;k vksj fnukad dks kke 5 cts rd leiw.kz mrrj izns k esa gkfkh dh ewfrz;ksa dks <d fn;k FkkA ;g leiw.kz dk;zokgh fuokzpu vk;ksx }kjk lafo/kku ds vuqpnsn 14 fof/k ds le{k lekurk ds rgr dh xbza ftl laca/k esa izkfkhz }kjk uksfvl fn;k x;k vksj dgk x;k fd gkfk dk iatk fuokzpu fpug ij jksd yxkbz tk;sa tks vusdtj ih&1 ;gfd] Hkkjr fuokzpu vk;ksx }kjk fnukad dks Hksts x;s uksfvl ftlesa Hkkjrh; lafo/kku ds vuqpnsn 14 fof/k ds le{k lkeurk,oa vkn kz pquko lafgrk ds laca/k esa fn;k x;k FkkA ftldk tckc Hkkjr fuokzpu vk;ksx ds vij lfpo izeksn dqekj kekz }kjk fnukada dks fn;k x;ka tks vusdtj ih&2 ;gfd] bafm;u us kuy dkaxzsl ikvhz dks Hkkjr fuokzpu vk;ksx }kjk fnukad dks ^^gkfk** (Hand) pquko fpug vkacfvr fd;k x;ka vkcavu i= ds vuqlkj &^^Indian National Congress Registration under section 29A if the representation of the people Act, 1951 as a political party- matters regarding. In continuation of the Commission s letter of even number dated , on the above subject, I am directed to state that the Election Commission of India, after having considered your application, dated , for registration of Indian National Congress as a political party and the documents produced in support of the statements/ averments made/ contained in the said application and submissions made by Sarvshri V.N. Gadgil, Gen. Secy., Gulam Nabi Azad, Gen, Secy, madan Bhatia, M.P., S.C. Maheshwari, Senior Advocate and R.N. Mittal, Advocate before the Commission on in respect of the said applicationm has registrated the said Indian National Congress as a political party under section 29A of the Representation of the People Act, 1951 on and with effect from As provided in sub-section (9) of section 29A of the Representation of the People Act, 1951, the party shall communicate to t he Commission without delay any charge in its name, head office, office-bearers, address or in any other material matters. In accordance with the provisions of sub-paragraph (2) of paragraph 7 of the Election Symbols (Reservation and Allotment) Order, 1968, as amended by the Election Symbols (Reservation and Allotment) (Second Amendment) Order, 1989, dated 11 th August, 1989 (copy enclosed), the party will be treated as a National Party and the symbol HAND will be reserved for it. mijksdr vkcavu vkns k fnukad tks vusdtj ih&3 7- ;gfd] izkfkhz }kjk fnukad dks ekuuh; eq[; fuokzpu vk;ksx Hkkjr ljdkj ubz fnyyh dks fn;s x;s vkosnu esa dgk fd yksdrkaf=d izfø;k ds rgr Hkkjr esa yxhkx 1300 iathd`r xsj eku;rk izkir jktuhfrd ny gs 12 V S Sampath Election Commissioner of India

13 ftles ls 322 yksdlhkk pquko,oa 52 eku;rk izkir jktuhfrd ny mdr vkosnu esa ernku dsunz ls 100 ehvj dh ijhf/k,oa gkfk pquko fpug,oa Hkkjrh; lafo/kku ds vuqpnsn 14 ds myya?ku ds laca/k esa fy[kk x;k gs vksj ftlesa yksdrkaf=d izfø;k ds rgr gkfk fujlr djus dh ekax dh xbz vusdtj ih&4 8- ;gfd] izkfkhz }kjk ekuuh; Jh vfer kkg th v/;{k Hkkjrh; turk ikvhz dks i= fy[kdj Hkkjrh; lafo/kku ds vuqpnsn 14 ds rgr gkfk fujlr djus ds lca/k esa fy[kk x;ka mijksdr i= fnukad dks fn;k x;k ftls muds }kjk fuokzpu vk;ksx ubz fnyyh dk;kzy; eas fnukad dks i= Øekad 483 ds }kjk izkir fd;k x;ka vusdtj ih&5 9- ;gfd] izkfkhz }kjk fuokzpu vk;ksx ubz fnyyh dks fn;s x;s vius vkosnu fnukad dk tckc F.No. 56/38/2011-PPS-II/100 Date ds }kjk Jh izeksn dqekj kekz vamj lsøsvjh Hkkjr fuokzpu vk;ksx }kjk tckc fn;k x;k fd Regarding the flag of Indian National Congress, your attention is invited to the Order date of the Hon ble Supreme Court in SLP No. 6195/2004 (B. Krishna Bhatt Vs. UOI and Ors.) In this connection, it is also informed that if any party of individual commits offecnce under the Prevention of Insult to National Honour Act, 1971, there are penal provisions under the said Act and recours can be had accordingly. Further, it is informed that the symbol Hand has been the reserved symbol of the Indian National Congress for more than three decades. It was an election symbol even before it was allotted to Indian Congress. Just because Hand is a part of the human body, it is not sufficient enoush reason to object to it as being used inside the polling station. There are several other election symbols which represent articles of daily use found in or around the polling stations, such as ceiling fan, table, stool, clock, inkpot & pen, cup & saucer and key etc. If any symbol is misused inside the polling station for soliciting votes, there are provisions to deal with such offences. izkfkhz dks fn;s x;s tckc fnukad vusdtj ih&6 10- ;gfd] fuokzpu vk;ksx ubz fnyyh dks fn;s x;s vius vkosnu fnukad dk tckc F.No. 56/6/2014/PPS- II/298 Date ds }kjk Jh izeksn dqekj kekz vamj lsøsvjh Hkkjr fuokzpu vk;ksx }kjk tckc fn;k x;k fd Freezing of the symbol Hand of Indian National Congress regarding your letter dated on the subject cited above. In this context, it is also informed that the symbol Hand has been the reserved symbol of the Indian National Congress for almost three and a half decade. It was an election symbol even before is was allotted to be Indian National Congress. Just because Hand is a part of the human body, it is not sufficient enough reason to object to it as an election symbol. There are several other election symbols which represent articles of daily use found in or around the polling stations, such as the ceiling fan, table, chair, stool, clock, inkpot & pen, cup & saucer and key etc. If any symbol is misused inside the polling station for soliciting votes, there are provisions to deal with such offences. izkfkhz dks fn;s x;s tckc fnukad vusdtj ih&7 11- ;gfd] fuokzpu vk;ksx ubz fnyyh dks fn;s x;s vius vkosnu fnukad dk tckc F.No. 56/6/2015/PPS- II/07Date ds }kjk Jh izeksn dqekj kekz vamj lsøsvjh Hkkjr fuokzpu vk;ksx }kjk tckc fn;k x;k fd To Freeze the symbol Hand of Indian National Congress- Regarding your letter received in the Commission on received in the Commission on on the subject cited above. In this context, it is informed that the symbol Hand has been the reserved symbol of the Indian National Congress for more than three and a half decades. It was an election symbol even before it was allotted to Indian National Congress. Just because Hand is a part of the human body, it is not sufficient enough reason to object to it as being used inside the polling station. There are several other election symbols which represent articles of daily use found in or around the polling stations, such as ceiling fan, table, chair, stool, clock, inkpot & pen, cup & saucer and key etc. If any symbol is misused inside the polling station for soliciting votes, there are provisions to deal with such offences. izkfkhz dks fn;s x;s tckc fnukad vusdtj ih&8 12- ;gfd] fuokzpu vk;ksx }kjk dh xbz dk;zokgh dh vkns k if=dk fnukad ls fnukad rd dh vkns k if=dk gs ftlesa gkfk ds iats dks fujlr djus ds laca/k esa fn;s x;s vkosnuksa ls lacaf/kr fo k; dk myys[k fd;k tks vusdtj ih&9 ;gfd] fnukad dks fjvfuzax vf/kdkjh fo/kkulhkk fuokzpu 183 egs oj ftyk [kjxksu ds i= Øekad 469@mifuokZpu@2012 ds }kjk ftyk fuokzpu vf/kdkjh ftyk [kjxksu fo/kkulhkk mipquko 183 fo/kkulhkk mi pquko 183 egs oj ds fy;s Hkkjrh; jk Vªh; dkaxzsl ds pquko fpug gkfk dk iatk dks rrdky izhkk ls lacaf/kr dj u;k pquko fpug vkcafvr djus ckcr~ f kdk;r dk tkap izfrosnua mi eamy vf/kdkjh e.mys oj dk i= Øekad@25@e.Mys oj fnukad ,oa,MoksdsV ftrsunz usxh la;kstd tupsruk eap egs oj dk i= fnukad A mijksdr fo k;,oa lanhkz esa fuosnu gs fd fo/kkulhkk mifuokzpu {ks= Øekad 183 egs oj ¼v-tk-½ ds laca/k esa,moksdsv ftrsunz usxh }kjk vius i= esa fcanq Øekad 01 ls 06 esa fofhkuu fcanqvksa ij turk ds fgr esa vius fcanq myysf[kr fd;s ftudk fcanqokj mrrj fueukuqlkj gs%& ¼fcanq Øekad 1½&,MoksdsV ftrsunz usxh }kjk tupsruk eap egs oj ds ek/;e ls turk ds fgr esa fd;s x;s dk;ksz dk myys[k f kdk;r i= esa ¼fcanq Øekad 2½& egs oj fo/kkulhkk dh fjdr lhv ds laca/k esa U;k;ky; ds LFkxu vkns k gksus ds ckctwn fuokzpu vk;ksx }kjk fuokzpu dh?kks k.kk ugha dh xbza bl gsrq eap }kjk tu tkx`rh dk dk;z djrs gq;s ekuuh; mpp U;k;ky; e-iz- [k.mihb banksj esa ;kfpdk izlrqr dh ftlds rgr fuokzpu vk;kx dks mipquko dh?kks k.kk djuk im+h dk myys[k f kdk;r i= esa ¼fcanq Øekad 3½& izr;sd pquko fu i{k rjhds ls] fufozokn rjhds ls leiuu gks bl ns k dh iztk rkaf=d O;oLFkk esa turk vius izr;k kh dk p;u lgh rjhds ls 13

14 dj lds,slh Hkkjr ds lafo/kku dh ea kk f kdk;r i= esa ¼fcanq Øekad 4½ & ns k esa jktusfrd ikvhz;ka gs mudks pquko fpug vkcafvr djus dk nkf;ro vki Øekad 1 dk vkids }kjk ns k esa Hkkjrh; jk Vªh; dkaxzsl dks gkfk dk iatk vkcafvr fd;k x;k tks fdlh Hkh pquko ds fy;s fu i{k pquko ugha gksus nsrk D;ksafd pquko nksjku fuokzpu vk;ksx ds vkns k,oa funsz k ij ernku d{k,oa mlds vkl&ikl pquko izrhd dks ys tkuk iznf kzr djuk izfrcaf/kr blds ckctwn Hkh ernku d{k ds vanj rfkk izfrcaf/kr {ks== esa gkfk ds iats pquko fpug dk mi;ksx gksrk ftlls fu i{k pquko ugha gks ik jgs bldk izr;s{k@vizr;s{k ykhk dkaxzsl dks fey jgk D;ksfd pquko izfø;k ds nksjku fuokzpu vf/kdkfj;ksa }kjk vu; jktusfrd nyksa funzfy; izr;k kh vkfn ds pquko fpug,oa jaxks dks iznf kzr ugha djus fn;k tkrk gsaa tcfd dkaxzsl dk pquko fpug gj le; iznf kzr gksrk jgrk blls,slk izrhr gksrk gs fd fuokzpu vk;ksx tks dkaxzsl dks pquko fpug vkcafvr fd;k gs og izr;{k@vizr;{k ykhk igqapkus dh fu;r ls fd;k f kdk;r i= esa pquko fpug iwoz ls vkcafvr tks Hkkjr fuokzpu vk;ksx ubz fnyyh }kjk vkcafvr gs mijksdr fcanq Hkkjr fuokzpu vk;ksx ubz fnyyh ds fujkdj.k dh ijhf/k esa mijksdr i= vusdtj ih& ;gfd] Hkkjr fuokzpu vk;ksx dh rhu lnl; lfefr }kjk fnukad dks vkns k fn;k fd ftlesa MkW-,lok; dqjs kh phq bysd ku deh kuj] Jh,p-,l- Hkzkek bysd ku deh kuj vkwq bafm;k] Jh oh-,l- leifk bysd ku deh kuj vkwq bafm;k }kjk Petitions seeking freezing of the symbol Elephant allotted as the reserved symbol of Bahujan Samaj Party, a National Park ds laca/k esa 1 yxk;r 45 lelr inksa esa of.kzr ftlesa eq[; :i ls in Øekad 6 ¼e½ The Indian National Congress has named many programmes, projects and institutions after their learders that have also distorted the level playing field in the electroal arena. The party is also propagating its symbol hand. in Øekad 8 ¼i½ Their petition before the Commission relates to the directives concerning the conduct of free and fair elections whereas their petition before the Supreme Court was against misuse of public money and violation of Article 14 of the Constitution. in Øekad 8 ¼iii½ The parallel drawn in the reply with the symbol of the Congress Party is totally misplaced. If the Congress Govt. were to erect a stand alone image of a hand, then the objection raised in his application would have applied to such an installation with equal force. in Øekad 43 In view of the above and taking into account the totality of the facts and circumstances available to the Commission, the reliefs prayed for by Shri Ravi Kant and others in their petitions under reference are not capable of being granted on the grounds urged therein and thus the said petitions are not maintainable. in Øekad 44 However, at the time of elections, the Commission would, no doubt, take appropriate steps and measures to see that the statutes of Ms. Mayawati and BSP s symbol elephant do not disturb the level playing field and give undue advantage to BSP vis-a-vis other political parties. in Øekad 45 These steps and measure would, however, be subject to any directions that may be passed by the Hon ble Supreme Court or Hon ble Allahabad High Court in the matters pending before them. mijksdr rhu lnl; MkW-,l-ok; dqjs kh phq bysd ku deh kuj] Jh,p-,l- Hkzkek bysd ku deh kuj vkwq bafm;k] Jh oh-,l- leifk bysd ku deh kuj vkwq bafm;k vkns k fnukad vusdtj ih& ;gfd] jfodkar,moksdsv lqizhe dksvz vkwq bafm;k }kjk fnukad dks lqcg 10%25 cts eq[; fuokzpu vk;qdr] Hkkjr fuokzpu vk;ksx dks i= Hkstk ftlesa fy[kk fd Violation of Model Code of Conduct by the Government of Uttar Pradesh and Implementation Honorable Election Commission of India Orders dated The election commission order dated in the petitions seeking freezing of the symbol Elephant allotted as the reserved symbol of Bahujan Samaj Party, a National Party on the complaint of Ravi Kant and Others. In the order the Election Commission at para 44 has stated the following: (44) However, at the time of elections, the Commission would, no doubt, take appropriate steps and measures to see that the statutes of Ms. mayawati and BSP s symbol elephant do not disturb the level playing field and give undue advantage to BSP vis-a-vis other political parties. The Election Commission has recently declared the schedule of Assembly Elections in Utta Pradesh and the Model Code of Conduct is in force across the entire State of Uttar Pradesh. In spite of the Model Code of Conduct in force huge gigantic statue of the Chief Minister including Election Symbols elephant which have been constructed with thousands of crores of Public Fund are prominently displayed across Uttar Pradesh and are distrubing the level playing field and give undue advantage to BSP vis-a-vis other political parties. In this regards the Election Commission needs to find out the following as mentioned in para 14 page 6 of the order dated which are as follows: (i) In how many parks/public place (with details of names, location of parks, etc.) statues of elephant and statues of Ms Mayawati have been erected/installed as alleged in the application. (ii) How many such statues have been constructed in each public place/park. (iii) The approximate cost of erection/installation of each statue. The Statues and Memorials of the Serving Chief Minister and Election Symbols of BSP prominently erected from public funds and full public view are a serious violation of Model Code of Conduct and urgent action is needed to implement the para 44 of the order dated mijksdr Jh jfodkar dk i= tks eq[; fuokzpu vk;qdr Hkkjr ljdkj dks fnukad dks Hkstk x;k gs tks vusdtj ih& ;gfd] fuokzpu vk;ksx }kjk Jh jfodkar ds i= ij ls fuokzpu vk;ksx }kjk fy[kh xbz uksv khv Øekad 464@U.P.- LA/2012(Cor.) NSIII ds vuqlkj mijksdr uksv khv fnukad (i) Shri Ravikant, Sr. Advocate Supreme Court of India has invited EC is alltention to its order dt in the matter of freezing of Elephant symbol of BSP. [Order may please be seen at F/A] Para 44 of the said order reads as below. However, at the 14

15 time of elections, the Commission would, no doubt, take appropriate steps and measures to see that the statutes of Ms. mayawati and BSP s symbol elephant do not disturb the level playing field and give undue advantage to BSP vis-a-vis other political parties. (ii) He has requested the commission to implement the aforesaid para of his order dt He has also asked the commission to obtain information s [which are referred is para 14 of the aforesaid order and which the up Govt had declimed to provide before the order was passed] How, these are:- (a) In how many parbs/ public place [with details of names, location of porbs etc] where slatutes of elephant and of Ms. Mayawati have been exected /installed as alleged in the application dt (b) How many such statutes have been constructed in each place/park. (c) The approximate cost of installation of such statue. (iii) In the regard it is submitted that the commission vide its instruction dt (as classified vide letter dt ) photographs/images of political leaders, other than natural leaders prominent historical personalities should be removed from govt. offices/promises during election process, as the same may disturb level playing fields. Further the instruction dt provide deletion of all references/photos from official websites shall be taken off/purged of. Instruction this for putting down/grounding of all hoarding describe a govt s achievements /policy during MCE Operation. (iv) As such, we may, prehaps:- (a) Direct that all statutes of Ms. Mayawati CM of UP and president BSP, which have been constructed/erected at the cost of public exchequer shall covered with a dark cloth till MCE is in operation. (b) Also ask the Chief Secretary to provide information mentioned in sub para (a) (b) & (c) of para (2) Which the UP Govt. had declined to give in Submitted by Commissioner Date ,oa fnukad dh vkwmzj khva tks vusdtj ih& ;gfd] Hkkjr fuokzpu vk;ksx Jh ds-,q- foyýsm izhafliy lsøsvjh }kjk fy[kh xbz uksv khv Commission s order dated in the matter of freezing of the symbol elephant allotted to BSP. In the petitions filed before the Commission by Shri Ravikant, Common Cause etc. seeking withdrawal of the elephant symbol from the BSP on the ground that statues of MS. Mayawati and statues of elephant were constructed in several public places at govt. expenses, the Commission had, while refusing to grant the request, observed as follows:- However, at the time of elections, the Commission would, no doubt, take appropriate steps and measures to see that the statutes of Ms. mayawati and BSP s symbol elephant do not disturb the level playing field and give undue advantage to BSP vis-a-vis other political parties. Now that the general election to the UP legislative assembly has been announced the commission may consider giving appropriate directions to the CEO is pursuance the observation quoted above. It may be mentioned here that in the Lok Sabha election, 2004, the Commission had directed that the photograph of the then Prime Minister put up at different places on highways and expressways should be covered so that the ruling party would not get any undue advantage. The Commission may consider directing the CEO to take steps to ensure that the statues of elephant and statutes of Ms. Mayawati put up at govt. expenditure are converted so that thses noy visible at any public place. I have discussed this with Ms. Meenakshi Arora, Commission s counsel is Superme Court. There is no order of the Supreme Court un the petitions before it which will come in the ay of such a direction by the Commission. Shri K.F. WILFRED Pr. Secy. Date ls fnukad ,oa ls ] ] ] rd dh vkns k if=dk vusdtj ih& ;gfd] Hkkjr fuokzpu vk;ksx }kjk mrrj izns k fo/kkulhkk pquko o kz 2012 esa gkfkh dh ewfrz;ksa dks <dus ds laca/k esa ftyk fuokzpu vf/kdkjh xksre cq) uxj }kjk vk;s [kpsz dh dqy jkf k 2]23]191@&:- ds laca/k esa fy[kh xbz vkns k if=dk vusdtj ih&15 gssa 18- ;gfd] Hkkjr fuokzpu vk;ksx ds Jh ds-,q- foyýsm izhafliy lsøsvjh }kjk fy[kh xbz vkns k if=dk fnukad ] ] ] ] ] vusdtj ih& ;gfd] Hkkjr fuokzpu vk;ksx ds vkns k fnukad ds ikyu esa y[kuå xksre cq) uxj lfgr mrrj izns k ds vu; ftyksa esa rrdky izhkko ls fnukad dks kke 5 cts rd lhkh ftyk fuokzpu vf/kdkfj;ksa dks funsz k fn;s x;s fd vfr kh?kzrkiwozd,oa vkikrdkyhu flfkfr esa jkrfnu dk;z djrs gq;s cgqtu lektoknh ikvhz dk fuokzpu fpug gkfkh dh ewfrz;ksa dks <dok fn;k x;ka 20- ;gfd] Hkkjr fuokzpu vk;ksx }kjk Jh vuwi fejk eq[; lfpo mrrj izns k kklu }kjk vkns k fnukad ds ikyu esa lelr ftyk vf/kdkfj;ksa lfgr leiw.kz iz kklfud fohkkxksa dks fdl dk;z dks djus gsrq funszf kr fd;k x;ka mijksdr vkns k fnukad vusdtj ih& ;gfd] fuokzpu vk;ksx }kjk fnukad dks gkfkh dh ewfrz;ka <dus laca/kh vkns k ds rgr eq[; lfpo mrrjizns k ds fy;s,d i= Jh lrh kpunz fejk jk Vªh; egklfpo cgqtu lektoknh ikvhz }kjk fn;k x;k,oa mijksdr i= dh izfrfyfi eq[; fuokzpu vk;ksx Hkkjr ljdkj,oa eq[; fuokzpu vf/kdkjh mrrj izns k y[kuå dks nh xbz mijksdr i= esa in Øekad 2 esa a Hkkjrh; lafo/kku ds vuqpnsn 14 ds uslfxzd U;k; dk [kqyk myya?ku gsa,oa in Øekad 3 esa fy[kk x;k fd vk;ksx }kjk cgqtu lektoknh ikvhz dh LFkkfir ewfrz;ka,oa gkffk;ksa dks <dsa tkus dk izko/kku gsaa pquko vk;ksx }kjk vxj ch-,l-ih- ds laca/k esa bl izdkj dk vkns k fn;k tkrk gs rks vu; nyksa }kjk lokztfud LFkyksa ij kkldh; O;; ij pquko fpug rfkk fufezr ewfrz;ksa dks <ds tkus ds vkns k Hkh rrdky fn;s tkus pkfg;sa ist uacj 2 ds isjk uacj 3 esa Jh lrh kpunz th us fy[kk fd gkfkh dh ewfrz;ka fdlh Hkh izdkj ls ernkrkvksa dks izhkkfor ugha djsaxha in Øekad 4 fuokzpu vk;ksx ds mdr,d rjq vksj HksnHkko iw.kz vkns k ds fo:) esa cgqr cm+k tu vkøks k isnk gks x;k gs [kklrksj ij nfyr lekt o finm+s oxz ds yksx vius dks <xk lk eglwl dj jgs in Øekad 5 Hkkjr fuokzpu vk;ksx dks vklolr djkuk pkgrk gw fd izns k esa fu i{k,oa 15

16 kkarhiw.kz pquko leiuu djkus esa ikvhz iw.kz lg;ksx djsxh vksj vk;ksx ds funsz kksa dk gj Lrj ij ikyu djsxha Hkkjr fuokzpu vk;ksx ls vius vkns k ¼fnukad ½ ij iquzfopkj dk vuqjks/k djrh gs rfkk vkxkeh fo/kku lhkk pquko esa ch-,l-ih- o mlds meehnokjksa dks Hkh leku volj izkir gks ldsa lrh kpunz fejk jk Vªh; egklfpo cgqtu lektoknh ikvhz }kjk fnukad dks fy[kk x;k i= vusdtj ih& ;gfd] Jh lrh kpunz fejk }kjk Hksts x;s i= fnukad dk mrrj Hkkjr fuokzpu vk;ksx ds izhafliy lsøsvjh Jh vkj-ds- JhokLro }kjk fnukad dks fn;k x;ka ftlesa in Øekad 2 esa fy[kk fd Article 14 of the Contitutions of India. The Commission does njot accept any of these allegations. ftlesa in Øekad 7 yxk;r 9 esa fy[kk fd You have stated that statues of icons at public places inspire people. And in the same breath, you have claimed that the statues of Ms. Mayawati would not influence voters, which is contradictory. In view of the reason given above, the Commission does not see any reason or justification to reconsider its order. The Commission has taken note of your assurance of cooperation in the conduct of impartial and peaceful election in Uttar Pradesh and conveys apperaciation of the same. The Commission values your specific assurance to go by its directions in the management of election in the state. Hkkjr fuokzpu vk;ksx ds izhafliy lsøsvjh Jh vkj- ds- JhokLor dk i= fnukad dks fy[kk x;k tks vusdtj ih& ;gfd] lrh kpunz fejk }kjk fnukad dks Hkkjr fuokzpu vk;ksx ds izhafliy lsøsvjh lrh k punz fejk dks fy[kk x;k i= ^^This is the reference to your letter dated 14 th January-2012 sent in reference to my letter dated 11 th January 2012 to the Chief Secreatry U.P. and a copy enclosed to the Chief Election Commissioner of India. ist uacj 3 ds isjk uacj 4 Similarty in respect to the symbol of Palm of Hand which is allotted to Indian National Congress. It is submitted that the Plam of the hand is the most prominent part of very statues of all deities of gods of almost every religion which are established in all regilious places including temples and public places and thus the plam of hand is directlu connected with all religious beliefs because it is through the hand that people seek ashirwad from gods through their deities/statues established everwhere. ist uacj 4 ds isjk uacj 5 It is therefore once again requested that the commission may kindly reconsider its direction of covering the statues in the light of the submission made above. Jh lrh kpunz fejk }kjk Hkkjr fuokzpu vk;ksx ds izhafliy lsøsvjh Jh vkj- ds- JhokLor dks fn;k x;k i= fnukad dks fy[kk x;k tks vusdtj ih& ;gfd] Hkkjr fuokzpu vk;ksx ds izhafliy lsøsvjh Jh vkj- ds- JhokLro }kjk fnukad dks phq lsøsvjh mrrj izns k dks Hkstk x;k i= vusdtj ih& ;gfd] Hkkjr fuokzpu vk;ksx ds izhafliy lsøsvjh Jh vkj- ds- JhokLro }kjk fnukad dks phq lsøsvjh mrrj izns k dks Hkstk x;k i= General Election to UP Legislative Assembly, 2012-covering of statues regarding. I am directed to refer to your D.O. dated 12 th January, 2012, on the subject cited, and to state that the Commission s letter dated 11 th January, 2012, makes it amply clear that the Commission desire to have the details of statues of other living political leader/symbols installed /constructed at the Sate govt. expense at public places. Reference in your aforesaid letter to cycles and hand pumps is totally extraneous and irrelevant in the context of the issue under consideration. I am, however, to state the Commission has considered your request for extensiion of time limit for providing the above said information and has extended it to 19 th January, izhafliy lsøsvjh Jh vkj- ds- JhokLor dks fn;k x;k i= fnukad dks fy[kk x;k tks vusdtj ih& ;gfd] Hkkjr fuokzpku vk;ksx ds izhafliy lsøsvjh Jh vkj- ds- JhokLor dks fn;k x;k i= fnukad dks fy[kk x;ka General Election to UP Legislative Assembly, covering of statues regarding. WP No. 266 of 2009 in Supreme needed to be covered. If any statues erected by the BSP at the party expense have been covered at any place due to misinterpretation of the Commission s aforesaid order, you may kindly give details thereof so that the same may directed to be uncovered. izhafliy lsøsvjh Jh vkj- ds- JhokLor dks fn;k x;k i= fnukad dks fy[kk x;k tks vusdtj ih& ;gfd] Hkkjr fuokzpu vk;ksx ds vkns k fnukad ds }kjk m-iz- esa gkfkh dh ewfrz;ksa dks <adus ds vkns k ds ckn ernkrkvksa ds vanj Hk; o vkrad dh flfkfr vk;ksx }kjk fufezr dj nh xbza mijksdr rf;ksa dks myys[k dks izlrqr izsl fokfir esa fdlh Hkh O;fDr }kjk Mj o Hk; ds dkj.k glrk{kj ugha fd;sa mijksdr fokfir ds in Ø- 1 esa fy[kk x;k fd fo/kku lhkk vke pquko [kre gksus rd m-iz- esa fofhkuu lkoztfud LFkyksa ij LFkkfir ek;korh o gkfkh dh ewfrz;ksa dks <adus dk vkns k fn;k x;ka Hkkjrh; lafo/kku ds vuqpnsn 14 ds uslfxzd U;k; dk [kqyk myya[ku ikdksza] Lekjdksa o laxzgky;ksa esa LFkkfir gkfkh dh ewfrz;ka tks Lokxr dh eqnzk esa lwam+ mbk;s gq;s Fkh lhkh ewfrz;ksa dks <adok fn;k x;ka mijksdr izsl fokfir fnukad vusdtj ih& ;gfd] eq[; fuokzpu vf/kdkjh m-iz- }kjk i= fnukad 04- ebz 2012 fo/kkulhkk fuokzpu 2012 gkfkh dh ewfrz;ka <adokus ds laca/k esa gksus okys O;; ls lacaf/kr lwpuk ftyk fuokzpu vf/kdkjh xksre cq) uxj] y[kuå ls ekaxh xbz tks vusdtkj ih& ;gfd] eq[; fuokzpu vf/kdkjh m-iz- }kjk i= fnukad 29 ebz 2012 fo/kkulhkk fuokzpu 2012 gkfkh dh ewfrz;ka <adokus ds laca/k esa gksus okys O;; ls lacaf/kr lwpuk ftyk fuokzpu vf/kdkjh xksre cq) uxj] y[kuå esa gq;s O;; dh jkf k 2]90]091-00@& gqbz dh tkudkjh lfpo Hkkjr fuokzpu vk;ksx dks nh xbz tks vusdtkj ih&26 16

17 30- ;gfd] ftyk fuokzpu vf/kdkjh xksre cq) uxj }kjk o kz 2012 esa gkfkh dh ewfrz;ksa dks <adus ds laca/k esa mi eq[; dk;zikyu vf/kdkjh xzsvj uks,mk }kjk O;; crk;k x;k fd 2]23]191-00@& :i;s O;; vkus dk i= vusdtkj ih&27 gs,oa,d vu; fcy ftlesa jkf k 1]58]586-00@& :i;s ik;k x;ka ftldk fcy vusdtkj ih&28 xszvj uks,mk vks ksfxd fodkl izkf/kdj.k ds mi eq[; dk;zikyu vf/kdkjh }kjk gkfkh dh ewfrz;ksa dks <adus ds laca/k esa izlrqr fcy jkf k 64]605-00@& :i;s vusdtkj ih& ;gfd] mrrj izns k jktdh; fuekz.k fuxe fyfevsm y[kuå ds egkizca/kd y-vk- 02 }kjk o kz 2012 esa gkfkh dh ewfrz;ksa dks <adus ds laca/k esa izlrqr fd;k x;k fcy @& :i;s vusdtj ih& ;gfd] Hkkjr fuokzpu vk;ksx ubz fnyyh dks Jh jfo kekz,moksdsv pamhx<+ }kjk i= fy[kk x;k ftlesa Representation to initiate action against Indian National Congress, 24, Adbar Road, New Delhi, and its Office baerers and leaders responsible for disrespect shown to the National Flag and misuse of the same for enhancing their Election Prospects, in Himachal Pradesh Assembly Election isjk uacj 4] 5 The manner and the style in which our National-Flag s is bluntly used by the party, hurts the feeling of the all Nationalist Citizens, as the number of National Flag s are shown below the Congress Party Officials Flags, in issued advertisement for gaining political mileage. Further the party has tried through these advertisement to cash the patriotism s by the merging our National Pride (National Flag) with Congress parties officials flag, which color scheme similar with National Flag, this emits a massage among all citizens that the massages spread out remove corruption, favoritism, forest and mining scam from Himachal Pradesh is guaranteed by Government of India, as National Flag, shown in this advertiement gives impression that this message is being issued by Govenment of India, which amounts to a corrupt practice under Section 123 of the Representation of the people Act 1951, which is reproduced as under. isjk uacj 7 (i) That the Registration and recoginzation of the Indian National congress be cancelled and withdrawn as a political party and initiate appropriate action against the aforesaid leaders under the provisions of Representations of People Act 1951, as they are members of Parliament and Legislative Assembly respectively. jfo kekz pamhx<+ dk i= fnukad vusdtj ih& ;gfd] us kuy dkaxzsl ikvhz }kjk dks tujy lsøsvjh,u-lh-ih- Jh rkjhd vuoj }kjk lfpo Hkkjr fuokzpu vk;ksx dks ftlesa Allotment & reservation of Symbol for contesting Parliamentary and Assembly Elections. This has reference to your letter No. 56/25/98/J.S.III/99 dated on the subject of amalgamation of Indian Congress (Socialist) with Nationalist congress Party. Nationalist Congress Party has been recognised as a State Party in the Union Territory of Andaman & Nicobar Islands. As per the Para 34(3) of the judgement, we submit below the list of Symbols alongwith the Artwork in the order of preference for allotment & reservation of symbol for National Congress Party. mijksdr i= vusdtj ih& ;gfd] Hkkjr fuokzpu vk;ksx }kjk cgqtu lektoknh ikvhz dks gkfkh fuokzpu izrhd iznku djus ds laca/k esa Hkstk x;k i= fnukad vusdtj ih& ;gfd] Hkkjrh; turk ikvhz }kjk fnukad dks fy[kk x;k i= On behalf of Bharatiya Janata Party recognised as a National Party this morning by you I am to state that teh symbol LOTUS ¼dey dk Qwy½ be allotted to the party for the corthcoming assembly elections. tks vusdtj ih& ;gfd] Hkkjr fuokzpu vk;ksx ds le{k fnukad dks ANKUSH + Rep. By, Mr. P.Naresh Reddy }kjk bf.m;u us kuy dkaxzsl ikvhz ds fo:) vkosnu fn;k ftlesa isjk ua- 2 The first respondent is a splinter group headed by Mrs. Sonia Gandhi, using originally the HAND symbol allotted to the Indian National Congress headed by Late Smt. Indira Gandhi, after teh original COW & CALF symbol of Indian National Congress was frozen by this Honorable Commission. isjk ua- 16(a) To freeze the HAND suymbol and direct the Indian National Congress Headed by Mrs. Sonia Gandhi to select any other free available with the Commission. i= fnukad vusdtj ih& ;gfd] v kksd eqams }kjk fnukad dks fy[kk x;k i= ftlessa Application regarding withdraw of Election Symbol Hand of Indian National Congress from the Maharashtra State at least. mijksdr i= vusdtj ih& ;gfd] Jh ih- ujs k jsm~mh vka?kz izns k ds i= fnukad dk tckc fnukad dks Hkkjr fuokzpu vk;ksx ds Jh izeksn dqekj kekz vamj lsøsvjh }kjk fn;k x;k ftlesa Complaint against the Indian National Congress regarding. Regarding your prayer for withdrawal of Hand symbol allotted as the reserved symbol of Indian National congress, it is pointed out that this symbol has been the symbol of party for the last three decades. Perior to allotment of this symbol to Indian National Congress, the Hand symbol was allotted as symbol to other parties in carlier elections. Therefore, the prayer of withdrawing the symbol on the grounds mentioned in your representation can not be granted. As regards the flag of Indian National Congress, your attention is invited to an order dated of the Hon ble Supreme Court in SLP No. 6195/2004. Order by this petition, the petitioner prays for a direction that the Indian National Congress Party be refrained from using their flag which is identical to National Flag as according to him it is violation of Section 123(3) of the Representation of the People Act. Indian National Congress Party has adopted this flag as their political party flag much before and, therefore, we do not find any merit in the petition. The special leave petition is dismissed. mijksdr i= vusdtj ih&37 17

18 39- ;gfd] Jh punz ks[kj _f knso ubz fnyyh ds i= fnukad dk tckc fnukad fnlecj 2011 dks Hkkjr fuokzpu vk;ksx ds Jh izeksn dqekj kekz vamj lsøsvjh }kjk fn;k x;ka ftlesa dkaxzsl ikvhz ds ysx o gkfk ds laca/k esa mijksdr i= vusdtj ih& ;gfd] Jh vjfoan kkjnk,moksdsv iatkc,oa gfj;k.kk gkbzdksvz }kjk jkt;ksa ds eq[; fuokzpu vf/kdkjh,oa phq lsøsvjh;ksa dks gkfk dk iatk,oa us kuy ysx ds laca/k esa fn;k x;k ftlds vuqlkj in Øekad 1 That both of the above mentioned political parties are using tri-colour pattern of the Indian National Flag in their respective party flags during all occasions. Indian National Congress and the Nationalist Congress Party have been respectively assigned election symbols of Hand and Colck by you noticee no. 1. in Øekad 5 isjk uacj 3 By applying Explanation 2 of Section 2 of Prevention of insuits to National Honour Act, 1971 mentioned above, tri-colour pattern used by Indian National Congress and NCP comes under the purview of Indian National Flag. mijksdr i= vusdtj ih& ;gfd] yksd izfrfuf/kro vf/kfu;e] 1951 dh /kkjk 30 ds vuqlkj ernku dsunz esa ;k mlds fudv er lap; dk izfr ks/k /kkjk 130 ¼1½ dksbz Hkh O;fDr ml rkjh[k dks ;k mu rkjh[kksa dks ftldks ;k ftudks fdlh ernku dsunz esa er gksrk gs ernku dsunz ds Hkhrj ;k ernku dsunz ls 100 ehvj dh nwjh ds Hkhrj fdlh yksd LFkku ;k izk;osv LFkku esa fueufyf[kr dk;z djsxka ¼d½ erksa ds fy;s la;kpuk ¼[k½ fdlh fuokzpd ls mlds er dks ;kpuk djuka ¼x½ fdlh fof k V vh;fkhz ds fy;s er u nsus dks fdlh fuokzpd dks eukuka ¼?k½ fuokzpu esa er u nsus ds fy;s fuokzpd dks eukuk vksj ¼M+½ fuokzpu ds laca/k esa dksbz lwpuk ladsr iznf kzr djuk ¼2½ tks dksbz O;fDr mi/kkjk ¼1½ ds mica/kksa dk myya?ku djsxk o tqekzus ls 250@&: rd dk gks ldsxk] n.muh; gksxka 42- ;gfd] /kkjk 131 ¼[k½ ernku dsunz ds fy;s ernku dsunz esa vkus okys fdlh O;fDr dks {kkshk gks ;k ernku dsunz esa drzo;:<+ vfqljksa ;k vu; O;fDr;ks ds dke esa glr{ksi djuka yksd izfrfuf/kro vf/kfu;e 1951 dh izfr vusdtj ih& ;gfd] Hkkjr fuokzpu vk;ksx ds vamj lsøsvjh }kjk lhkh iz kklfud mpp vf/kdkfj;ksa dks fy[kk x;k i= fnukad ds isjk uacj 2 In the Allahabad High Court at Lucknow Bench W.P. (PIL-Civil) (/B) No. 603 of Pratap Chandra Vs. Union of India & others regardings. The above said Order of the Hon ble High Court may be noted and also brought to the notice of the orders of the party at all level to ensure that there is no violation of the provisions of the Flag Code and the Acts mentioned in the Order. fuokzpu vk;ksx dk i= fnukad vusdtj ih&41 gssa 44- ;gfd],moksdsv vkyksd ih- eqms egkjk Vª }kjk fnukad dks Hkkjr fuokzpu vk;ksx dks fy[ks x;s i= ftlesa Application regarding withdarw of Election Symbol Hand of Indian National Congress from the Maharasthra State at least. Ground The Maharastra Police logo, having Hand Symbol at the Center, Same like above symbol. So please withdraa the Symbol Hand, of the Indan National Congress from the State of Maharastra at least, for the interest of Public and interest of Justice. i= fnukad vusdtj ih&42 gssa 45- ;gfd] nhi fj[kkm+h,moksdsv ftyk usuhrky mrrjk[kam }kjk fnukad dks mdr fuokzpu vk;ksx dks fn;s x;s i= esa myys[k fd;k gs fd &^^vk;ksx ds funsz k ij iksfyax cwfkksa ij u dsoy fofhkuu ikfvz;ksa ds pquko fpugksa ls feyrs tqyrs fpug tsls jk Vªh; iq i dey] gkfkh] vyekjh] di IysV vkfn dks Nqik fn;k x;k ;k fqj gvk fn;k x;k cfyd dbz iwoz iz/kkueaf=;ksa,oa jk Vªfirk egkrek xka/kh dh rlohj rd gvk nh xbz rkfd pquko izhkkfor u gks ldsa oksfvax e khu esa lkeus ls yxs Hkkjr fuokzpu vk;ksx ds fcuk pø ds frjaxs ds fu kku ls Hkh ernkrkvksa ds dkaxzsl ikvhz ds i{k esa izhkkfor gksus dh iw.kz vk kadk Fkh vksj lehkor% ernkrk izhkkfor gq;s Hkh esjs Lo;a ds vkifrr ntz djus ij ihbklhu vf/kdkjh us eq>s crk;k fd ;g fu kku Hkkjr fuokzpu vk;ksx dk gs vksj bls ugha gvkus dks ge ck/; tks mijksdr i= vusdtj ih& ;gfd] thrsunz Hkkjrh t;iqj }kjk eq[; fuokzpu vk;qdr Hkkjr fuokzpu vk;ksx dks fnukad dks fy[ks x;s i= esa fy[kk fd fuokzpu izrhd gkfk dk ernku dsunz ds 200 ehvj dh ijhf/k ds Hkhrj izn kzu izfrcaf/kr fd;s tkus ckcr~a bafm;u us kuy dkaxzsl ikvhz }kjk ernku dsunz ds Hkhrj fuokzpu izrhd dks iznf kzr,oa izpkfjr fd;k tkrk tks fd vkn kz vkpkj lafgrk dk myya?ku tcfd vk;ksx }kjk gkfkh fuokzpu izrhdksa dks <dok;k x;ka vkxkeh yksdlhkk fuokzpu esa bafm;u us kuy dkaxzsl ds fy;s vkjf{kr fuokzpu izrhd ^^gkfk** dks izr;sd ernku dsunz ls 200 ehvj dh ijhf/k esa vksj ernku dsunz ds vunj iznf kzr vksj izpkfjr fd;k tkuk izfrcaf/kr djus gsrq izr;sd yksdlhkk fuokzpu {ks= ds izhkkjh ftyk fuokzpu vf/kdkfj;ksa,oa lelr jkt;ksa ds eq[; fuokzpu vf/kdkfj;ksa dks funsz k iznku djus gsrq leqfpr vkns k ikfjr djus vksj ikfjr fd;s x;s vkns k ls fueuglrk{kjdrkz dks Hkh lalwfpr fd;k tkuk lqfuf pr djus dk Je djsaa Hkkjr fuokzpu vk;ksx dks fy[kk x;k i= vusdtj ih& ;gfd] Hkkjr fuokzpu vk;ksx dks Hksts x;s vkosnu ds vuqlkj fjvfuzax vkwfqlj 183&egs oj us fo/kku lhkk mipquko ds fy;s Hkkjrh; jk Vªh; pquko fpug gkfk ds iats dks rrdky izhkko ls izfrcaf/kr dj u;k pquko fpug vkacfvr djus laca/kh izfrosnu Hkstk ftlesa fy[kk x;k fd ernku ds le; dkaxzsl ds,tsav,oa dk;zdrkz ernkrkvksa dks gkfk dk iatk fn[kkdj xqejkg djrs gs,oa ernku dsunz ds vanj o izfrcaf/kr {ks= esa gkfk fgykdj iznf kzr djrs mijksdr iats dks rrdky izfrcaf/kr fd;k tk;sa mijksdr vkosnu izkir gksus ij fjvfuzax vkwfqlj }kjk mijksdr vkosnu uksv khv lfgr Hkkjr fuokzpu vk;ksx ubz fnyyh dks Hksth ftl ij ls vk;ksx }kjk fnukad dks vkwmzj khv ys[k dh xbza tks The report an endorsement copy which is originally to 18

19 DEO, Khargone. The returning officer, 183-Maheshwar A.C. has submitted his report in the complanint of Advocate Jitendra Negi Co-ordination Jan Chetna Manch dated The Subject matter in bering dealt by PPS II. So PS I may please sel for in the matter dated Hkkjr fuokzpu vk;ksx dks Hksth xbz vkns k if=dk vusdtj ih& ;gfd] lkeku; iz kklu,oa tuf kdk;r fuokj.k fohkkx NRrhlx<+ }kjk Jh ls;;n buk;r vyh fnanokm+k e-iz- dk vkosnu i= izkir gqvka ftlesa Hkkjrh; jk Vªh; dkaxzsl ds iatk pquko fpug jn~n fd;s tkus ds laca/k esa myys[k mijksdr i= Jh ds-,e- vxzoky izhkkjh vf/kdkjh tuf kdk;r fuokj.k izdks B leku; iz kklu fohkkx jk;iqj fnukad dks eq[; pquko vk;qdr Hkkjr ljdkj dks Hkstk x;ka tks vusdtj ih& ;gfd] bunzonu ivsy cm+ksnjk }kjk fnukad dks Hkkjr fuokzpu vk;skx dks fy[kk x;k ftlesa Can any one file writ petition is supreme court of india that election symbol given to congress in wrong because congress candidate is missusing at both area for elction prachar on day of election and in room of voting both according to our election rules of India no candidate or polliting agent can use their symbol upto 100 meters but congress candidates are using their hand for election prachar in both area so our election commissioner must give another symbol to congress. Please file one petition as early as possible. mijksdr ysvj,oa vkwmzj khv fnukad tks vusdtj ih& ;gfd] Hkkjr fuokzpu vk;ksx esa o kz 2002 ls yhxy,mokbztj ds :i esa Shri S.K. Mendiratta ftugsa vk;ksx }kjk o kz 2017 ds vuqlkj bugsa vk;ksx }kjk fueu osru HkRrs,oa vu; ykhk fueu vuqlkj iznku fd;s tkrs gs& 1 April 2017 to 31 st March (1) He will be paid a consolidated sum of Rs, 80,000/- (Rupees Eighty thounsdand only) per month as remuneration. (2) He will be provided with the facility of a landline phone in the office and at his resisdence at per with the Principla Secretary in the Election Commission of India. (3) He will we provided a computer and printer at residence and in office with Internet facility (unlimited usage). (4) He will be provided a mobile phone at par with the Deputy Election Commissioner in the Election Commission of India. (5) He will be provided hospitality provision at Par with the Principal Secretary in the Election Commission of India. (6) For official tour, he will be provided facilities, TA/DA etc. at par with the Deputy Election Commission in the Election Commission of India. (7) He will be provided office space, office stationary and office support staff as needed from time to time. (8) He will be provided staff car/taxi for pick up from residence and dropping at residence and for travel in connection with office work. (9) Additionally he will be paid fees if he is required to appear before the Court on behald of the Commission as an advocate of the Commission. (10) The appointment may be terminated after adequate notice on either side. mijksdr in fnukad vusdtj ih& ;gfd] lqizhe dksvz lfgr Hkkjr ds fofhkuu mpp U;k;ky;ksa esa,oa ftyk U;k;ky; esa fuokzpu vk;ksx }kjk isjoh djus gsrq fu;qdr fd;s x;s,moksdsv~l ¼lqizhe dksvz½ 1- Jh lquhy kekz] 2- Jh eksfgr Mh jke ¼bykgkckn gkbzdksvz½ 1- Jh euh k ekfkqj 2- Jh HkwisUnz ukfk flag 3- Jh vks-ih- JhokLro ¼vka/kzizns k gkbzdksvz½ 1- Jh vfouk k nslkbz ¼ckWEcs gkbzdksvz½ 1- Jh iznhi jktxksiky 2- Jherh uhjtk fxjh k pkscs 3- Jh vkyksd kekz ¼dydRrk gkbzdksvz½ 1- Jh fni;ku pks/kjh ¼enzkl gkbzdksvz½ 1- Jh fujatu jktxksiky ¼fnYYkh gkbzdksvz½ 1- Jh ih-vkj- pksim+k ¼xqtjkr gkbzdksvz½ 1- Jh lkfgy kkg ¼xqokgVh gkbzdksvz½ 1- Jh nsok kh k ¼tEew,oa d ehj gkbzdksvz½ 1- Jh,l-,- ed: ¼dsjyk gkbzdksvz½ 1- Jh eqjyh ¼e/; izns k gkbzdksv XOkfy;j ½ 1- Jh Mh- ds- dvkjs 2- Jh fl)kfkz,l- lsb ¼iVuk gkbzdksvz½ 1- Jh fl)kfkz izlkn ¼iatkc,oa gfj;k.kk gkbzdksvz½ 1- Jh ufer dqekj ¼jktLFkku gkbzdksvz½ 1- Shri B.C. Chirania ¼jkaph gkbzdksvz½ 1- Jh v kksd dqekj flag ¼mRrjk[kaM gkbzdksvz½ 1- Jherh vatyh HkkxZo mijksdr vfhkhkk kd fofhkuu jkt;ksa ds mpp U;k;ky;ksa esa vk;ksx dh vksj ls isjoh djus gsrq fu;qdr fd;s x;s gs tks vusdtj ;gfd] fnukad dks fo/kku lhkk fuokzpu o kz 2017 ds laca/k esa ftyk fuokzpu vf/kdkjh y[kuå }kjk izsl dkuýsal cqykbz xbz ftlesa lokannkrkvksa }kjk ehfm;k dfez;ksa }kjk xr ^^yksd lhkk pquko** esa y[kuå esa fofhkuu LFkkuksa ij yxh gqbz gkfkh dh ewfrz;ksa dks <ads tkus dk gokyk nsrs gq;s orzeku le; esa bl fcanq ij dk;zokgh ds ckjs esa tkudkjh pkgh tks ftyk fuokzpu vf/kdkj y[kuå ds i= Øekad 145@16 fnukad ds vuqlkj fofhkuu LFkkuksa ij LFkkfir ewfrz;ksa ds ckcr~ vkpkj lafgrk ds fø;kuo;u ds laca/k esa leqfpr ekxzn kzu djus dk vuqjks/k fd;k x;ka mijksdr i= fnukad dks Jh jes kpunz jk; la;qdr eq[; fuokzpu vf/kdkjh y[kuå }kjk iz/kku lfpo Hkkjr fuokzpu vk;ksx dks fy[kk x;k tks vusdtj ih& ;gfd] vij ftykf/kdkjh@mi ftyk fuokzpu vf/kdkjh y[kuå }kjk eq[; fuokzpu vf/kdkjh mrrjizns k y[kuå dks bl vk k; dk,d i= fy[kk fd izsl dkauýsal fnukad esa foxr yksdlhkk pquko esa fofhkuu LFkkuksa ij yxh gqbz gkffk;ksa dh ewfrz;ks dks <dus dk gokyk nsrs gq;s orzeku le; esa bl fcanq ij dk;zokgh ds ckjs esa tkudkjh pkgh mijksdr i= vusdtj ih& ;gfd] mi ftyk fuokzpu vf/kdkjh y[kuå }kjk eq[; fuokzpu vf/kdkjh mrrjizns k y[kuå dks bl vk k; dk,d i= fy[kk fd izsl dkauýsal fnukad esa foxr yksdlhkk pquko esa fofhkuu LFkkuksa ij yxh gqbz gkffk;ksa dh ewfrz;ks dks <dus dk gokyk nsrs gq;s orzeku le; esa bl fcanq ij dk;zokgh ds ckjs esa tkudkjh ds laca/k esa fy[kh xbz uksv khv fnukad vusdtj ih& ;gfd] la;qdr eq[; fuokzpu vf/kdkjh mrrjizns k }kjk fnukad dks fy[kh xbz uksv khv ds vuqlkj 1- dì;k xr i` B la[;k &1 ij vafdr fvii.kh,oa vkns kksa dk voyksdu djus dk d V djsaa 2- voxr djkuk gs fd 19

20 ftyk fuokzpu vf/kdkjh] y[kuå ls gkfkh dh ewfrz;ksa dks <ds tkus ds laca/k esa izkir lanhkz dks xr i` B la[;k &1 ij vafdr fvii.kh ds vuqlkj izlrqr fd;k x;k FkkA 3- xr i` B ij egksn; }kjk mfyyf[kr fvii.kh ds laca/k esa vij eq[; fuokzpu vf/kdkjh egksn; }kjk ;g i`pnk dh xbz gs fd ^,* ij D;k funsz k gs\ 4- bl laca/k esa voxr djkuk gs fd%& ¼v½ fo/kku lhkk lkeku; fuokzpu &2012 ds nksjku Hkkjr fuokzpu vk;ksx }kjk i= fnukad ¼irkdk&^d*½ ds ek/;e ls gkfkh dh ewfrz;k dks <dus ds laca/k esa funsz k fuxzr fd;s x;s FksA ¼c½ vk;ksx ds mdr funsz kksa ds vuqlkj ftyk fuokzpu vf/kdkjh] y[kuå,oa xksrecq)uxj dks vko ;d dk;zokgh djus gsrq dgk x;k rfkk ftyk fuokzpu vf/kdkfj;ksa ls izkir vuqikyu vk[;k Hkkjr fuokzpu vk;ksx dks bl dk;kzy; ds i= fnukad ¼irkdk&^[k*½ ds }kjk izsf kr dh xbza ¼l½ Hkkjr fuokzpu vk;ksx }kjk iqu% i= fnukad ¼irkdk &^x*½ ds }kjk <dh xbz ewfrz;ksa ij gksus okys O;; ls lacaf/kr lwpuk miyc/k djk;s tkus ds funsz k fn;s x;sa ¼n½ ftyk fuokzpu vf/kdkjh] y[kuå,oa xksrecq) ls vk;ksx ds funsz kkuqlkj okafnr lwpuk miyc/k djkus gsrq dgk x;k rfkk ftyk fuokzpu vf/kdkfj;ksa ls izkir lwpukvks ads bl dk;kzy; ds i= fnukad ¼irkdk&^?k*½ ds }kjk Hkkjr fuokzpu vk;ksx dks izsf kr fd;k x;ka pwafd orzeku fo/kku lhkk lkeku; fuokzpu &2017 esa gkfkh dh ewfrz;ks dks <ds tkus ds laca/k esa dksbz Hkh v?kru funsz k Hkkjr fuokzpu vk;ksx ls bl dk;kzy; dks izkir ugha gq;s gs] vr% ftyk fuokzpu vf/kdkjh] y[kuå ls izkir i= dks layxu dj Hkkjr fuokzpu vk;ksx dks vk;ksx ds ekxzn kzu gsrq Hkstk tkuk mfpr izrhr gksrk rnuqlkj lgefr dh n kk esa dì;k eq[; fuokzpu vf/kdkjh egksn; dk vuqeksnu izkir djuk pkgsaa mijksdr vkns k if=dk Jh Vh- osadvs k eq[; fuokzpu vf/kdkjh,oa izeq[k lfpo fuokzpu mrrjizns k kklu] Jh vfuy xxz vij eq[; fuokzpu vf/kdkjh,oa lfpo fuokzpu mrrjizns k kklu] Jh jes kpunz jk; la;qdr eq[; fuokzpu vf/kdkjh mrrjizns k,oa Jh ohjsunz dqekj oekz vuqhkkx vf/kdkjh mrrjizns k y[kuå dh la;qdr vkns k if=dk vusdtj ih& ;gfd] Hkkjr fuokzpu vk;ksx }kjk mijksdr i= ds vk/kkj ij fnukad dks fy[kh xbz uksv khv CEO, U.P. has sought directions from the Commision whether to cover the statues of elephants installed at various places in U.P. In this regard, it is submitted that the Commission via is order dated instructed that at the time of elections, each and every statue of BSP s symbol elephant constructed/erected in public place in U.P. at the government expense, shall be suitably covered so that they do not disturb the level playing field during the elections. This may be communicated to the CEO. vksj fnukad ] ] ] ] ] dks fy[kh xbz vkns k if=dk tks vusdtj ih& ;gfd] lwpuk ds vf/kdkj ds rgr fnukad dks lgk;d ftyk fuokzpu vf/kdkjh y[kuå ls fo/kku lhkk fuokzpu 2017 esa vkn kz vkpkj lafgrk ds rgr gkfkh dh ewfrz;ksa dks <dus ds laca/k esa tkudkjh pkgh tks vusdtj ih&55 gsaa 58- ;gfd] fnukad dks bafm;u us kuy dkaxzsl ikvhz ds fuokzpu fpug gkfk ds laca/k esa iz/kkuea=h Jh ujsunz eksnh,oa x`gea=ky; Hkkjr ljdkj dks Hkstk x;k i= ds laca/k esa tkudkjh fnukad vusdtj ih&56 gsaa fnukad dks ftyk fuokzpu vf/kdkjh nfr;k dks fn;k x;k Kkiu ftlesa bafm;u us kuy dkaxzsl ikvhz ds fuokzpu fpug gkfk,oa ikvhz /ot ds laca/k esa fn;k x;k tks vusdtj ih& ;gfd] fnukad dks eq[; fuokzpu vf/kdkjh dks Hkstk x;k vkosnu ftlesa bafm;u us kuy dkaxzsl ikvhz }kjk jk Vªh; /ot ds :i esa ikvhz /ot ds :i esa mi;ksx djuk,oa gkfk dks fuokzpu fpug ds :i esa mi;ksx djus ds laca/k esa fd;k x;k tks vusdtj ih& ;gfd] fnukad dks fxjh k kekz }kjk bafm;u us kuy dakxzsl ikvhz ds fuokzpu izrhd gkfk,oa jk Vªh; /ot ds nq:i;ksx ds laca/k esa fd;s tk jgs glrk{kj vfhk;ku dk fojks/k nfr;k ftyk dkaxzsl }kjk fd;k x;k lekpkj i= dh izfr vusdtj ih& ;gfd] fnukad dks cgqtu lektoknh ikvhz ds Jh lrh k punz fejk }kjk Jh vkj-ds- JhokLro vij lsøsvjh Hkkjr fuokzpu vk;ksx dks fy[kk x;k i= ftlesa Hkkjrh; lafo/kku ds vuqpnsn 14 dk nq:i;ksx dj cyiwozd gkfkh dh ewfrz;ksa dks <dokus ds laca/k esa fy[kk x;ka i= ds in Øekad 5 When it is mentioned in para 3 of my letter dated quoted in para 5 of your letter dated 14 th january-2012 of the effect ^^fdarq vk;ksx us cgqtu lekt ikvhz dh LFkkfir ewfrz;ksa,oa gkffk;ksa dks <ds tkus ds laca/k esa tks fu.kz; ysdj bl ikvhz dks grksrlkfgr djus dk dke fd;k gs] og U;k;ksfpr ugha vk;ksx }kjk bl laca/k esa fu i{k fu.kz; fy;k tkuk pkfg;s Fkk] rkfd ch-,l-ih- dks Hkh pquko esa cjkcjh dk volj feyrka** the said mentioning is only and only in respect to the action being taken allegedly on the basis of the directions of Commission for covering even the statues of elephant s established by B.S.P. from its own funds in private places. tks vusdtj ih& ;gfd] fnukad dks bafm;u us kuy daxzsl ikvhz ds fuokzpu fpug gkfk,oa jk Vªh; /ot ds :i esa ikvhz /ot ds mi;ksx ds laca/k esa Hkstk x;k i= vusdtj j ih& ;gfd] fuokzpu vk;ksx dh vkns k if=dk fnukad ds vuqlkj Hkkjr fuokzpu vk;ksx fnyyh esa izkir vkosnu ftlesa bafm;u us kuy dkaxzsl ikvhz ds fuokzpu fpug gkfk esa Hksts x;s fpug dk lhfj;y Øekad 131&142(R) ds vuqlkj & 1. (i) Dr. Ram Jawale (ii) S. Keshav P (iii) Manobhav Tripathi (iv) Dr. Tirath Garg (v) Nutan Thakur 2. (i) Girish Sharma (ii) Manisha Sharma (iii) Kailash Chandra 3. Shri Ramniranjan Gaur 4. Dr. Ravindra Kumar 5. Phool Chand Mullana ds }kjk bafm;u us kuy dkaxzsl ikvhz ds fuokzpu fpug gkfk,oa jk Vªh; /ot ds laca/k esa dgk x;k gs mijksdr vkns k if=dk ds in Øekad 3 In addition to above the complainant mentioned at SL. no. (2) may also be intimated that the symbol Hand has been the reserved 20

21 symbol of the Indian National Congress for almost three decades. It was an election symbol even before it was allotted to the Indian National Congress. Just because Hand is a part of the human body, it is not sufficient enough reason to object to it as an election symbol. There are several other election symbols which represent articles of daily use found in or around the polling station, such as the ceiling fan, table, chair, stool, clock, inkpot & pen, cupo & sauccer and key etc. If any symbol is misused inside the polloing station for soliciting votes, there are provisions to deal with such offences. vkns k if=dk fnukad ] ] ] ] ] tks vusdtj ih& ;gfd] fnukad dks Hkkjr fuokzpu vk;ksx ds vij lfpo Jh izeksn dqekj kekz }kjk Hksts x;s i= Jh ksj eksgeen kkg e-iz- esa ys[k fd;k gs fd dkaxzsl ds pquko fpug gkfk ds iats dks fujlr djus ckcr~a dk tckc vk;ksx }kjk fn;k x;k& ^^ fo k; ij vius i= fnukad dk lanhkz ysaa bl fo k; esa vkidk /;ku yksd izfrfuf/kro vf/kfu;e dh /kkjk 123 ¼3½ dh vksj vkd` V djrs gq;s dguk gs fd mdr vf/kfu;e ds varxzr fdlh vh;fkhz dks vkcafvr dksbz izrhd bl [k.m ds iz;kstuksa ds fy;s /kkfezd izrhd ;k jk Vªh; izrhd ugha le>k tkrk vkxs ;g Hkh lwfpr fd;k tkrk gs fd gkfk pquko fpug bafm;u us kuy dkaxzsl dk finys rhu n kdksa ls vkacfvr ;g pquko fpug bl ikvhz dks vkcafvr djus ls igys vu; nyka dks Hkh iwoz ds fuokzpuksa ds fy;s vkcafvr FkkA vr% vkids i= ds vk/kkj ij bafm;u us kuy dkaxzsl ds pquko fpug ^gkfk dk iatk* dks fujlr djus dk dksbz Li V dkj.k vk;ksx dks izrhr ugha gksrk tks vusdtj ih& ;gfd] fnukad dks uwru Bkdqj y[kuå }kjk eq[; fuokzpu vk;qdr Hkkjr fuokzpu vk;ksx dks fy[kk x;k i= ftlesa mlesa izkfkzuk dh gs fd& The Election Commision of India may kindly exercise the powers conferred on it by Article 324 of the Constitutin read with sectiion 29A of the RP Art and all other powers enabling it in this behalf to formulate some appropriate Regulation or Order to provided for specification, reservation, choice and allotment of flags of the political parties aas well, just as it is presently being done in the case of Election symbols. The above Regulation or order may provided for those association or body desirous of getting registered as a political party under section 29A of the RP Art to bring facts and details brought their flag in the knowledge of the Election Commission, who whould accordingly take appropriate decisiion as regards the party flag as well, at the time of the registration itself. mijksdr i= vusdtj ih& ;gfd] Hkkjr fuokzpu vk;ksx }kjk ernkrkvksa dks tkx:d djus ds fy;s fudkys x;s ikslvj ftlesa yksdra= dh D;k igpku tkx:d ernkrk fu i{k ernku dgrs gq;s fnukad dks izdkf kr fokkiu vusdtkj ih& ;gfd] Hkkjr fuokzpu vk;ksx }kjk o kz 2016 esa ernkrkvksa dks tkx:d djus ds fy;s izdkf kr lhkh fokkiuksa esa O;fDr **gkfk** esa oksvj iphz o oksvj dkmz fy;s gq;s fn[kk;k x;k gs bl izdkj lhkh fokkiuksa esa bf.m;u us kuy dkaxzsl ikvhz ds fuokzpu fpug gkfk dks iznf kzr dj izpkj izlkj fd;k x;k ftlesa gkfk dh mxayh esa fuokzpu L;kgh yxkrs gq;s n kkz;k x;k gs vksj nwljh rjq dkaxzsl ikvhz ds >.Ms ds rhu jaxksa dh ifí;ka cukbz x;h mijksdr fokkiu Hkkjr fuokzpu vk;ksx }kjk dks tkjh fd;k x;k tks vusdtkj ih&66 66] ;gfd] Hkkjr fuokzpu vk;ksx }kjk lwpuk ds vf/kdkj ds rgr fnukad dks izsf kr i= ds lkfk esa mppk U;k;ky; bykgkckn [k.mihb y[kuå }kjk ;kfpdk Ø- 603@14 ih-vkbz-,y- vkns k fnukad ds ikyu esa Hkkjr fuokzpu vk;ksx }kjk dk;zokgh] funsz kksa ds izfr fnukad dks lhkh jk Vªh;,oa jktusfrd ikvhz;ksa dks mpp U;k;ky; ds vkns kksa dh izfrfyfi Hksth x;h Fkh tks vusdtj ih&68 mijksdr vkns k ds vuqlkj The President/General Secretary/Chairperson of all recognized National and State Political Parties. Subject - In the Allahabad High Court at Lucknow Bench W.P. (PIL-Civil) (/B) No. 603 of 2014 Pratap Chandra Vs. Union of India & others-regarding. Sir, I am directed to forwad herewith a copy of the order dated passed by the Hon ble High Court of Allahbad at Lucknow Bench on the issue of use of National flag in rallies of political parties. The relief claimed in the petition was for a direction to the respondents (Central Government, State Government of Uttar Pradesh, Election Commission and State Election Commission) not to allow the use of national flag in rallies of political parties. The Hon ble High Court of Allahabad disposed of the petition with the observation that there is no prohibition of proper use of national flag by political parties in rallies and that it is the bounden duty of the authorities concerned to ensure strict compliance and observance of the provisions of the Flag Code and the provisions of Emblem and names (Prevention of Improper use) Act., 1950 and the Prevention of insults to National Honour Act The above said Order of the Hon ble High Court may be noted and also brought to the notice of the cadres of the party at all level to ensure that there is no violation of the provisions of the Flag Code and the Acts mentioned in the Order. Copy to : The Chief Electoral Officers of all States/UTs. mijksdr i= Jh,u-Vh- HkwfV;k vamj lsøsvjh Hkkjr fuokzpu vk;ksx }kjk Hkstk x;ka ijarq mlds ckn Hkh bf.m;u us kuy dkaxzsl ikvhz }kjk jk Vªh; /ot esa iatk Nkidj mijksdr vkns k dh vosgyuk dh mpp U;k;ky; y[kuå ds vkns k ds laca/k esa Hkkjr fuokzpu vk;ksx }kjk lhkh jktusfrd ikfvz;ksa dks fnukad dks Hksts x;s i= tks vusdtj ih& ;gfd] Hkkjr fuokzpu vk;ksx }kjk lwpuk ds vf/kdkj ds rgr fnukad dks Hksth x;h tkudkjh ftlds vuqlkj lafo/kku ds vuqpnsn 324 ds vuqlkj fuokzpu ds eq[; fuokzpu vk;ksx,oa vu; fuokzpu vk;qdrksa dh fu;qfdr laca/kh tkudkjh iznku dh xbz ftlds }kjk fuokzpu vk;ksx dk xbu ernkrkvksa ds vf/kdkjksa dh j{kk djuk vksj fu i{k iwozor fuokzpu djkuk tks i= fnukad ,oa vuqpnsn 324 dh izfr vusdtkj ih&70 21

22 70- ;gfd] Hkkjr esa orzeku esa osf od lalfkk oymz,uhey izkstsdv ¼MCYkw,ih½ ds,d losz ds vuqlkj o kz 2014 ls 2016 ds e/; Hkkjr esa taxyh gkffk;ksa dh la[;k 30]711 gs,oa i;zvd LFkyksa ij *jkbfm+ax,fdvfovh* gsrq yxhkx 3500 ca/kqvk gkfkh tks i;zvd {ks=ksa esa ds laca/k esa fnukad dks izdkf kr lkekpkj i= dh izfr vusdtj ih& ;gfd] Hkkjr fuokzpu vk;ksx }kjk Hksts x;s lhkh jkt;ksa ds izeq[k fuokzpu vf/kdkjh dks Hksts x;s i= fnukad ds vuqlkj The Chief Electoral Officers of All States & Union Territories. Subject- Preventive measures near polling booths on poll day Setting up of Election Booths by the Candidates regarding. Sir/Madam, I am directed to state that the Commission has issued instruction on the subject cited vide instruction no. 464/INST/2007/PLN-I dated Para 2 of the instruction stipulates that Only one table two chairs shall be provided at each such booth with an umbrella or a piece of tarpaulin or cloth to protect the two occupants of those chairs at the booth from weather conditions. Such booth shall not be enclosed by Kanats and tentage, etc. Feedbacks have been received that in view of hot weather conditions, the above stipulation should be relaxed so that candidates are allowed to setup small tents. The Commission has considered this feedback and request and has decided that in view of the extreme weather conditions, the candidates can be allowed to setup small tents not measureing more than feet outside the 200 meters periphery of the polling station. ds laca/k esa fnukad dks Jh lqfer eq[kthz] lfpo Hkkjr fuokzpu vk;ksx dk i= vusdtj ih& ;gfd] Hkkjr fuokzpu vk;ksx }kjk ernku dsunz ds 200 ehvj dh ifjf/k esa fdlh Hkh izr;k kh o ernkrk }kjk fuokzpu fpug ys tkus ds laca/k esa fn;s x;s funsz k] vkns k dh izfr fnukad ds vuqlkj The Chief Secretaries of all States and UTs, The Chief Electoral Officers of all States and UTs. Sub Prevetive measures near polling booth on poll day-setting up of Election Booths by Candidates/Political Parties. No booth shall be set up within a distance of 200 metres from the Polling Station. Even where more than one polling station has been set up in the same Polling Station Location or premises, there shall be only one booth of a candidate for such group of polling Stations beyound a distance of 200 meters from such premises. mdr i= ls Jh,-ds- etwenkj lfpo Hkkjr fuokzpu vk;ksx }kjk fn;k x;k gs tks vusdtkj ih& ;gfd] Hkkjr fuokzpu vk;ksx }kjk iznku dh xbz lwph jk Vªh; ny ds :i esa vkb ny gs ftuds vkjf{kr fuokzpu fpug 1- vkwy bf.m;k r`.kewy dkaxzsl ¼iq i vksj r`.k½] 2- cgqtu lekt ikvhz ¼gkFkh½] 3- Hkkjrh; turk ikvhz ¼dey½] 4- de;qfu V ikvhz vkwq bf.m;k ¼cky vksj gafl;k½] 5- de;qfu V ikvhz vkwq bf.m;k ¼ekDlZflLV½ ¼cky vksj gafl;k½] 6- bafm;u us kuy dkaxzsl ikvhz ¼gkFk½] 7- us kufylv dkaxzsl ikvhz ¼?kM+h½ dks fn;s x;s fpugksa dh izfr vusdtj ih& ;gfd] Hkkjr fuokzpu vk;ksx }kjk jkt; nyksa dh iznku dh lwph 1- vka/kzizns k (i) rsyxkauk jk Vª lfefr fuokzpu fpug dkj (ii) rsyxw ns ke~ fuokzpu fpug lkbfdy (iii) ;qotu Jfed jk;fkq dkaxzsl ikvhz fuokzpu fpug Nr dk ia[kk 2- v:.kkpy izns k (i) ihiqyl ikvhz vkwq v:.kkpy izns k fuokzpu fpug eddk 3- vle (i) vkwy bf.m;k ;wuk;vsm MseksØsfVd ÝaV fuokzpu fpug rkyk vksj pkch (ii) vle x.k ifj kn~ fuokzpu fpug gkfkh (iii) cksmksys.m ihiyl ÝaV fuokzpu fpug ukaxksy 4- fcgkj (i) turk ny ¼;wuk;VsM½ fuokzpu fpug rhj (ii) yksd tu kfdr ikvhz fuokzpu fpug caxyk (iii) jk Vªh; turk ny fuokzpu fpug ykyvsu (iii) jk Vªh; yksd lerk ikvhz fuokzpu fpug vhkh vkoafvr fd;k tkuk ks k gs] 5- xksok] egkjk Vª xksekard fuokzpu fpug ksj] 6- gfj;k.kk] bafm;u us kuy yksd ny fuokzpu fpug p ek 7- teew o d ehj (i) teew,.m d ehj us kuy dkaýsl fuokzpu fpug gy (ii) teew,.m d ehj us kuy isafklz ikvhz fuokzpu fpug lkbzfdy (iii) teew,.m d ehj ihiqyl MseksØsfVd ikvhz fuokzpu fpug L;kgh dh nokr vksj dye] 8- >kj[k.m (i) vktlq ikvhz fuokzpu fpug dsyk (ii) >kj[k.m eqfdr ekspkz fuokzpu fpug rhj&deku (iii) >kj[k.m fodkl ekspkz ¼>kj[k.M½ fuokzpu fpug da?kk (iv) jk Vªh; turk ny fuokzpu fpug ykyvsu 9- dukzvd (i) turk ny ¼lsD;wyj½ fuokzpu fpug flj ij /kku ys tkrh gqbz d` kd efgyk (ii) dukzvd turk i{k fuokzpu fpug vhkh vkcafvr ugha gqvk] 10- dsjy (i) turk ny ¼lsD;wyj½ fuokzpu fpug flj ij /kku ku ys tkrh gqbz d` kd efgyk (ii) dsjy dkaxzsl ¼,e½ fuokzpu fpug nks ifrr;k (iii) bafm;u ;wfu;u eqflye yhx fuokzpu fpug nks ifrr;k (i) fjoksy;w kujh lks kfylv ikvhz fuokzpu fpug QkoM+k,oa csypk 11- egkjk Vª (i) egkjk Vª uofuekz.k lsuk fuokzpu fpug jsyos batu (ii) f kolsuk fuokzpu fpug rhj deku 12- ef.kiqj (i) ukxk ihiqyl ÝUV fuokzpu fpug eqxkz (ii) ihiqyl MseksØsfVd,ykbUl fuokzpu fpug eqdqv] 13- es?kky; (i) ;wuk;vsm MseksØsfVd ikvhz fuokzpu fpug Mªe (ii) fgy LVsV ihiqyl MseksØsfVd ikvhz fuokzpu fpug ksj (iii) us kuy ihiqyl ikvhz fuokzpu fpug fdrkc] 14- fetksje (i) fetks us kuy ÝaV fuokzpu fpug flrkjk (ii) fetksje fiiqyl dkaxzsl fuokzpu fpug fctyh dk cyc (iii) tksje us kufylv ikvhz fuokzpu fpug lw;z ¼fdj.k jfgr½ 15- ukxkysam (i) ukek ihiqyl ikvhz fuokzpu fpug eqxkz 16- jk Vªh; jkt/kkuh fnyyh (i) vke vkneh ikvhz fuokzpu fpug >kmw 17- chtw turk ny fuokzpu fpug ka[k] 18- iqmqpsjh (i) vkwy bafm;k vuuk nzfom+ equus= dm+xe fuokzpu fpug nks ifrr;k (ii) vkwy bafm;k,u-vkj- dk xzsl fuokzpu fpug tx (iii) nzfom+ equus= dm+xe fuokzpu fpug mnh;eku lw;z (iv) iv~vkfy eddy dkwph fuokzpu fpug vke 19- iatkc (i) f kjksef.k vdkyh ny fuokzpu fpug rjktw] (ii) vke vkneh ikvhz fuokzpu fpug >kmw] 20- flfdde (i) flfdde MseksØsfVd ÝaV fuokzpu 22

23 fpug Nkrk] (ii) flfdde Økafrdkjh ekspkz fuokzpu fpug Vscy ysai] 21- rfeyukmq (i) vkwy bafm;k vuuk nzfom+ equus= dm+xe fuokzpu fpug nks ifrr;k (ii) nzfom+ equus= dm+xe fuokzpu fpug mnh;eku lw;z (iii) nsfl;k eqjiksddq nzfom+ dm+xe fuokzpu fpug uxkm+k] 22- rsyaxkuk (i) vkwy bf.m;k etfyl&,&brsgknqy eqflyehu fuokzpu fpug irax (ii) rsyaxkuk jk Vª lfefr fuokzpu fpug dkj (iii) rsyqxq ns ke fuokzpu fpug lkbfdy (iv) ;qoktuk Jfedk jk;fkw dkaxzsl ikvhz fuokzpu fpug Nr dk ia[kk] 23- mrrj izns k (i) jk Vªh; yksd ny fuokzpu fpug gsam iei] (ii) lektoknh ikvhz fuokzpu fpug lkbfdy] 21- if pe caxky (i) vkwy bf.m;k QkWjokMZ CykWd fuokzpu fpug ksj (ii) fjoksy;w kujh lks kfylv ikvhz fuokzpu fpug QkoM+k vksj csypk tks vusdtj ih& ;gfd] Hkkjr fuokzpu vk;ksx }kjk eqdr izrhdksa dh lwph fnukad ds vuqlkj fuokzpu fpug 1-,vjdaMh ku] 2- vyekjh] 3- vkwvksfjd kk] 4- csch okwdj] 5- xqcckjk] 6- pwfm+;ka] 7- Qyks ls ;qdr Vksdjh] 8- cyyk] 9- cyysckt] 10- csvjh VkpZ] 11- eksfr;ksa dk gkj] 12- csyv] 13- csup] 14- lkbfdy iei] 15- nwjchu] 16- fcldqv] 17- CySdcksMZ] 18- vkneh o iky ;qdr uksdk] 19- cksry] 20- cdlk] 21- Mcy jksvh] 22- bzav] 23- czhqdsl] 24- cqz k] 25- ckyvh] 26- dsd] 27- dsydwysvj] 28- dsejk] 29- dsu] 30- eksecfrr;ka] 31- f keyk fepz] 32- dkiszv] 33- dsje cksmz] 34- QwyxksHkh] 35- tathj] 36- pddh] 37- pikrh jksyj] 38- piiysa] 39- krjat cksmz] 40- fpeuh] 41- fpevh] 42- dksv] 43- ukfj;y] 44- ukfj;y QkeZ] 45- dyj Vªs vksj cqz k] 46- pkjikbz dsjy jkt; dks½] NksM+dj lhkh jkt;ksa vksj la?k jkt; {ks=ksa esa] 47- Øsu] 48-?ku] 49- di vksj IysV] 50- dfvax Iyk;j] 51- nko] 52- ghjk] 53- Mhty iei] 54- fm k,afvuk] 55- Mksyh] 56- n~okj?kavh] 57- fmªy e khu] 58- MEcYl] 59- fctyh dk [kahkk] 60- fyqkqk] 61-,DlVs ku cksmz] 62- ck lqjh] 63- QOokjk] 64- Ýkd] 65- Ýkbax isu] 66- dhi] 67- xsl flys.mj] 68- xsl dk pwygk] 69- migkj] 70- dk p dk fxykl] 71- Xyksc] 72- xzkeksqksu] 73- vaxwj] 74- gjh fepz] 75- gkjeksfu;e] 76- Vksi vka/kz izns k,oa½ rsyaxkuk jkt;ksa dks NksM+dj lhkh jkt;ksa vksj la?k jkt; {ks=ksa esa] 77- gsmqksu] 78- gsyesv] 79- gkwdh vksj cky] 80- vkbl Øhe rfeyukmq½ jkt; dks NksM+dj lhkh jkt;ksa vksj la?k jkt; {ks=ksa esa] 81- ikuh xje djus dh jkwm] 82- izsl] 83- fhkamh] 84- dqumh] 85- ysvj ckwdl] 86- ykbvj] 87- yup ckwdl] 88- ekfpl dh fmcch] 89- ekbzd] 90- fedlh] 91- usy dvj] 92- xys dh VkbZ] 93- uwmyl dvksjk] 94- dm+kgh] 95- isav] 96- ew xqyh] 97- uk kikrh rfeyukmq o½ iqnqpsjh dks NksM+dj] 98- evj] 99- dye dh fuc lkr fdj.kksa ds lkfk] 100- isulvs.m] 101- isfuly fmcck] 102- isulhy kkizuj] 103- isumqye] 104- ewly vksj [kjy] 105- isvªksy iei] 106- Qksu pktzj] rfd;k] vukukl] 109- djuh] 110- [kkus ls Hkjh Fkkyh] 111- IysV LVS.M] 112- gkumh] 113- izs kj dqdj] 114- iafpax e khu] 115- jstj] 116- jsfýtjsvj] 117- vaxwbh] 118- jksm+ jksyj] 119- :e dwyj] 120- :e ghvj] 121- ls Vh fiu] 122- Ldwy dk clrk] 123- dsaph] 125- flykbz dh e khu] 126- twrk] 127- dwnus dh jllh] 128- LysV] 129- lkcqunkuh] 130- tqjkcsa] 131- LVSiyj] 132- LVSFkksLdksi] 133- LVwy] >wyk] 135- flfjut] 136- est] 137- pk; Nyuh] 138- VsyhQksu] 139- Vsyhfotu] 140- Vsful cyyk,o xsan] 141- VSUV] 142- Vhyj] 143- VkWfQ;k -] 144- nk r cqz k] 145- VwFkisLV] 146- VSªDVj pykrk fdlku] 147- Vsª] 148- f=hkqt] 149- Vªd] 150- rqjgh] 151- VkbZie khu] 152- Vk;j] 153- osd;we Dyhuj] 154- ok;fyu] 155- NM+h] 156- nhokj?km+h] 157- cvqvk] 158- v[kjksv] 159- rjcwt] 160- dqvk ] 161- gkfk jsgm+h] 162- lhvh] 163- f[km+dh] 164- Åu o flykbz] lwpuk ds vf/kdkj ds rgr Hkkjr fuokzpu vk;ksx }kjk nh xbz tkudkjh esa eqdr izrhdksa dh lwph fnukad tks vusdtj ih& ;gfd] Hkkjr fuokzpu vk;ksx dks fnukad dks fn;s x;s vkosnu esa lwpuk ds vf/kdkj ds rgr QkbZy uacj 56@06@1981 dh leiw.kz izekf.kr izfrfyfi ekaxh xbz ijarq fuokzpu vk;ksx }kjk mijksdr QkbZy [kkstus ij Hkh izkir u gksus ds ys[k ds lkfk nsus ls badkj dj fn;ka mijksdr QkbZy esa bf.m;u us kuy dkaxzsl ikvhz dks iznku fd;s x;s o kz 1981 esa gkfk fuokzpu izrhd ds fo:) fofhkuu ikfvz;ksa }kjk vkifrr dh xbz ls lacaf/kr fjdkmz gs ftls fuokzpu vk;ksx }kjk tkucw>dj vksj Hkkjrh; lafo/kku ds vuqpnsn 14 ds nq:i;ksx vk;ksx }kjk fd;s tkus ds mijksdr QkbZy esa izfke n` V~;k izek.k bl dkj.k ls mijksdr QkbZy dh izekf.kr izfr ugha nh xbza tks vusdtj ih&77 77A 77- ;gfd] Hkkjr fuokzpu vk;ksx }kjk i= fnukad ds vqulkj ekaxh xbz tkudkjh 1- bf.m;u us kuy dkaxzsl ikvhz }kjk fuokzpu izrhd ¼pquko fpug½ gkfk dk iatk fn;s x;s vkosnu dh izekf.kr izfrfyfi vk;ksx }kjk nh xbz tkudkjh **bf.m;u us kuy dkaxzsl esa gq, fookn ds QyLo:i lu~ 1981 esa Jhefr bafnjk xka/kh ds usr`ro okys xqv dks vk;ksx n~okjk bf.m;u us kuy dkaxzslk ekuk x;k rfkk xk;&cnm+k fuokzpu izrhd blds fy, miyc/k ekuk x;k ;fn lacaf/kr jktusfrd ny blds fy, vkosnu izlrqr djsa vu;fkk fookn ds le; vlfkk;h :i ls vkoafvr gkfk fuokzpu izrhd j[kus dk vkns k fn;k x;ka ijarq lacaf/kr jktusfrd ny us bf.m;u us kuy dkaxzsl uke ls eku;rk izkfir ds mijkar dksbz u;k vkosnu ugha izlrqr fd;ka lu~ 1989 esa iathdj.k fd;k x;k rfkk gkfk fuokzpu izrhd blds fy, vkjf{kr fd;k x;ka** in Ø- 7 ernku dsunz ls fuokzpu izrhdksa dks fdruh nwjh rd izfrca/kr fd;k x;k gs] ds laca/k esa tkjh fu;ekoyh ¼vkns k o funsz k½ dh izekf.kr izfrfyfia ftldk mrrj vk;ksx }kjk fn;k x;k fd & **bl laca/k esa vkidks yksd izfrfuf/kro vf/kfu;e] 1951 dh /kkjk 130&ernku dsunzksa esa ;k muds fudv er la;kpuk dk izfr ks/k dk gokyk fn;k tkrk ;g izko/kku esa fn;k x;k gsa tks vk;ksx dh osclkbv ij fueu ifk ij miyc/k gs & nh xbz tkudkjh vusdtj ih&78 78A 78- ;gfd] dk;kzy; eq[; fuokzpu vf/kdkjh mrrjizns k y[kuå }kjk lwpuk ds vf/kdkj ds rgr nh xbz tkudkjh fnukad esa ekaxh xbz lwpuk & Jh jes k punz jk;] la;qdr eq[; fuokzpu vf/kdkjh] dk;kzy; eq[; 23

24 fuokzpu vf/kdkjh] y[kuå] mrrj izns k }kjk i= la[;k 158@lh-bZ-vks-&1&7@1&2017 Vh-lh- y[kuå fnukad 10 tuojh] 2017 esa Hkkjr fuokzpu vk;ksx] ubz fnyyh ls fo/kku lhkk lkeku; fuokzpu&2017 dh izfø;k esa vkn kz vkpj.k lafgrk ls lacaf/kr ekxzn kzu ds laca/k esa y[ks x;s i= ftlesa y[kuå o vu; txg **gkfkh** dh ewfrz;ksa dks <dus ds laca/k esa ekxzn kzu ekaxk x;k gs] mdr i= ds tcko,oa uksv khv dh izekf.kr izfrfyfi ekaxh x;h fuokzpu vk;ksx }kjk nh x;h lwpuk ds lkfk esa mijksdr vkns k gs ds laca/k esa nh xbz lwpuk& bl dk;kzy; ds i= la[;k 158@lh-bZ-vks-&1&7@1&2017 Vh-lh- y[kuå fnukad 10 tuojh] 2017 ds lanhkz esa Hkkjr fuokzpu vk;ksx ls ekxzn kzu izkir ugha gqvk Hkkjr fuokzpu vk;ksx dks bl dk;kzy; dk mdr i= fnukad dks izsf kr fd;s tkus ds laca/k esa dk;kzy; dh i=koyh ds uksv khv ds i` V la[;k&1,ao 2 dh izekf.kr Nk;kizfr layxu dh xbza mijksdr i= lgk;d eq[; fuokzpu vf/kdkjh mrrj izns k] y[kuå }kjk fnukad dks fd;k x;ka tks vusdtj ih& ;gfd] Hkkjr fuokzpu vk;ksx }kjk lwpuk ds vf/kdkj ds rgr fnukad dks Hksts x;s i= ds vuqlkj pkgh xbz tkudkjh& 1- fuokzpu vk;ksx Hkkjr ljdkj }kjk lu~ 1981 esa Jherh bafnjk xka/kh ds usr`ro okyh xqv dks bafm;u us kuy dkaxzsl ekurs gq;s vlfkk;h :i ls vkcafvr gkfk dk iatk Lohd`r gsrq fn;s x;s vkosnu dh izekf.kr izfrfyfia vk;ksx }kjk nh xbz tkudkjh & **bl laca/k esa vkidks lwfpr fd;k tkrk gs fd Hkkjr fuokzpu vk;ksx ds s le{k izlrqr vkosnu ftlesa Jherh bafnjk xka/kh ds usr`ro okyh xqv dks bafm;u us kuy dkaxzsl ¼vkbZ½ ekurs gq;s vlfkk;h :i ls vkcafvr gkfk dk iatk Lohd`r djus dk vuqjks/k ds vkosnu ij dkjokbz dh x;h Fkh] og QkbZy vhkh vk;ksx esa [kksth ugha tk ldh [kkstus dk vuojr iz;kl tkjh gs] tsls gh QkbZy miyc/k gksxh] vkidks vkosnu dh izfr Hkst nh tk,xha** 2- fuokzpu vk;ksx Hkkjr ljdkj }kjk lu~ 1981 ds ckn ¼bafM;u us kuy dkaxzsl½ }kjk izlrqr dksbz u;k vkosnu LFkk;h pquko fpug gsrq izlrqr fd;s x;s vkosnu dh izekf.kr izfrfyfia vk;ksx }kjk nh xbz tkudkjh & **vkidk iz u vli V vkius 1981 ls vc rd tks fd yech le;kof/k gs] esa vk, vkosnuksa ds laca/k esa lwpuk ekaxh gs tks fd ladfyr :i esa miyc/k ugha ** 4- fuokzpu vk;ksx Hkkjr ljdkj }kjk lu~ 1981 ds iwoz gkfk dk iatk fdl ikvhz dks vkcafvr Fkk] mdr vkcavu i= dh izekf.kr izfrfyfia vk;ksx }kjk nh xbz tkudkjh & **bl laca/k esa vkidks lwfpr fd;k tkrk gs fd gkfk dk iatk 1981 ls iwoz fdlh ikvhz dks vkcafvr Fkk] ls lacaf/kr lwpuk vk;ksx esa ladfyr :i esa miyc/k ugha ** 5- o kz 2010 ls Hkkjr fuokzpu vk;ksx }kjk mrrj izns k,oa e/; izns k yksdlhkk o fo/kkulhkk ds fuokzpu ds le; ernku dsunzksa esa fuokzpu izrhd,oa fuokzpu izrhdksa dsa laca/k esa tkjh funsz k o vkns kksa dh izekf.kr izfrfyfia vk;ksx }kjk nh xbz tkudkjh & **izrhdksa ds laca/k esa vyx ls dksbz funsz k o vkns k tkjh ugha fd;k x;k ** mijksdr i= Hkkjr fuokzpu vk;ksx ds vij lfpo Jh v ouh dqekj eksgy }kjk fnukad dks fn;k x;ka tks vusdtj ih& ;gfd] Hkkjr fuokzpu vk;ksx }kjk fnukad dks fn;s x;s vius vkosnu esa fy[kk fd %& ekaxh xbz lwpuk Hkkjr fuokzpu vk;ksx dh Qkby ua 56@06@1981 dh leiw.kz izekf.kr izfra tks vusdtj ih& 81 nh xbz lwpuk bl laca/k esa vkidks lwfpr fd;k tkrk gs fd vkids fnukad vkj-vh-vkbzvkosnu tks vk;ksx esa dks izkir gqvk] ds mrrj i= la[;k fnukafdr ¼izfr layxu½a lkfk gh vkidk /;ku dsunzh; lwpuk vk;ksx ds lwpuk dh iqujko`frr ds laca/k esa tkjh fnukad ds vkns k la- CIC/AD/A/2013/ SA dh vksj vkd` V fd;k tkrk gs ftlds rgr lwpuk dk iqujko`frr ij lwpuk nsus ls badkj djus dk izko/kku fd;k x;k fvii.kh vkosnd Jh fxjh k kekz }kjk muds fnukafdr vkosnu ds en la-¼v-½ ds tckc esa lwfpr fd;k x;k fd Qkby la vk;ksx esa [kksth ugha tk ldh rri pkr~ vkosnd us dks fqj ls vkj-vhvkbz- vkosnu esa mdr Qkby dh izfr ekaxh xbza rfkkfi vkosnd dks igys gh lwfpr fd;k tk pqdk Fkk fd Qkby ugha [kksth tk ldh gs vr% vkosnu dks muds fnukafdr vkosnu ds mrrj dk lanhkz ysus dks dgk x;ka lkfk gh lkfk dsunzh; lwpuk vk;ksx ds iqujko`fr ds laca/k esa tkjh fnukad ds vkns k CIC/AD/A/2013/ SA lanhkz Hkh ysus dks dgk x;ka 24

25 ;gfd] Hkkjr fuokzpu vk;ksx }kjk fnukad dks fy[kh xbz viuh vkns k if=dk esa fy[kk fd& Following 2 files related to recognised political parties are missing during their movement and now is not traceable. 1. Bahujan Samaj Party (F. No. 56/06/198) All divisions/personal Sections are requested to kindly trace the file in their section and if found, the same may be sent to political section II immediately as the file is required for dealing an RTI application. tks vusdtj ih& ;gfd] Hkkjr fuokzpu vk;ksx }kjk lwpuk ds vf/kdkj ds rgr ekaxh xbz tkudkjh dk i= fnukad dks fn;k x;ka ftlds vuqlkj ekaxh xbz lwpuk & ^^1- fuokzpu vk;ksx Hkkjr ljdkj }kjk lu~ 1981 esa Jherh bafnjk xka/kh ds usr`ro okyh xqv dks bafm;u us kuy dkaxzsl ekurs gq;s vlfkk;h :i ls vkacafvr gkfk dk iatk Lohd`r gsrq fn;s x;s vkosnu dh izekf.kr izfrfyfia** fuokzpu vk;ksx }kjk nh xbz tkudkjh ds vuqlkj &^^og QkbZy vhkh vk;ksx esa [kksth ugha tk ldh gsaa [kkstus dk vuojr iz;kl tkjh gs] tsls gh QkbZy miyc/k gksxh] vkidks vkosnu dh izfr Hkst nh tk;sxha** mijksdr QkbZy esa bafm;u us kuy dkaxzsl ikvhz dks vkcafvr gkfk ds laca/k esa vu; jktuhfrd nyksa }kjk O;kid vkifrr dh xbz FkhA bl dkj.k ls mijksdr QkbZy dks tkucw>dj fuokzpu vk;ksx }kjk mijksdr QkbZy ls lacaf/kr nlrkost ugha fn;s x;s& ^^2- fuokzpu vk;ksx Hkkjr ljdkj }kjk lu~ 1981 ds ckn ¼bafM;u us kuy dkaxzsl½ +}kjk izlrqr dksbz u;k vkosnu LFkk;h pquko fpug gsrq izlrqr fd;s x;s vkosnu dh izekf.kr izfrfyfia** tckc & ^^ladfyr :i esa miyc/k ugha ** 4- fuokzpu vk;ksx Hkkjr ljdkj }kjk lu~ 1981 ds iwoz gkfk fdl ikvhz dks vkcafvr Fkk] mdr vkcavu i= dh izekf.kr izfrfyfia** tckc& lacaf/kr lwpuk vk;ksx esa ladfyr :i esa miyc/k ugha ** 5- o kz 2010 ls Hkkjr fuokzpu vk;ksx }kjk mrrjizns k,oa e/; izns k yksdlhkk o fo/kkulhkk ds fuokzpu ds le; ernku dsunzksa esa fuokzpu izrhd,oa fuokzpu izrhdksa ds laca/k esa tkjh funsz k o vkns kksa dh izekf.kr izfrfyfia** tckc& ^^bl laca/k esa vkidks lwfpr fd;k tkrk gs fd Hkkjr fuokzpu vk;ksx }kjk mrrjizns k,oa e/;izns k yksdlhkk o fo/kkulhkk ds fuokzpu ds le; ernku dsunzks esa fuokzpu izrhd,oa fuokzpu izrhdksa ds laca/k esa vyx ls dksbz funsz k o vkns k tkjh ugha fd;k x;k ** mijksdr tkudkjh fnukad ds i= }kjk nh xbz tks vusdtj ih& ;gfd] vk;ksx ls lwpuk ds vf/kdkj ds rgr tkudkjh ekaxh xbz i= fnukad ds }kjk er la[;k 6ch,oa lh esa iwnk x;k fd oksfvax e khu ij lkeus dh vksj jk Vªh; /otksa ds rhu jax dh ifv~v;k tks fuokzpu vk;ksx dk fpug gs tks oksfvax e khu ij Nkik x;ka ftl laca/k esa tkjh vkns k ds laca/k esa tkudkjh pkgh xbza vk;ksx }kjk izlrqr tckc esa dgk x;k fd & ^^en la[;k 6 ch,oa lh& bl rjg dk dksbz vkns k vk;ksx }kjk tkjh ugha fd;k x;k oksfvax e khu ij] rhu jaxksa dh ifv~v;k ds kfj;k] lqsn] gjs jax tks fuokzpu vk;ksx dk fpug gs] ugha gksrk ;fn vki mijksdr nh xbz tkudkjh ls vlarq V gs rks izfke vihy bl i= dh izkfir frffk ls 30 fnu ds vanj dh tk ldrh *** mijksdr lwpuk fnukad vusdtj ih& ;gfd] vk;ksx ls lwpuk ds vf/kdkj ds rgr tkudkjh ekaxh xbz i= fnukad esa pkgh xbz tkudkjh mrrjizns k fo/kkulhkk fuokzpu o kz 2017 esa gkfkh dh ewfrz;ksa dks <ds tkus ds laca/k esa tkjh vkns k@funsz k dh izfr vk;ksx }kjk nh xbz tkudkjh&^^vk;ksx }kjk ewfrz;ksa dks <dus ds laca/k esa o kz 2017 esa dksbz vkns k tkjh ugha fd;k x;k ** mijksdr lwpuk fnukad vusdtj ih& ;gfd] vk;ksx ls lwpuk ds vf/kdkj ds rgr tkudkjh ekaxh xbz i= fnukad esa pkgh xbz tkudkjh ds laca/k esa i= esa pkgh xbz tkudkjh &**Hkkjr fuokzpu vk;ksx }kjk o kz 2014 esa yksd lhkk mrrjizns k ds xksrecq)uxj esa LFkkfir gkfkh dh ewfrz;ksa dks <dus ds laca/k esa tkjh funsz k@vkns k dh vkns k if=dk lfgr izekf.kr izfrfyfia** tckc& ^^Hkkjr fuokzpu vk;ksx }kjk o kz 2014 esa yksd lhkk lkeku; fuokzpu 2014 ds le; tuin xksrecq)uxj esa LFkkfir gkfkh dh ewfrz;ksa ds <dus ds laca/k esa dksbz fn kk&funsz k tkjh ugha fd;s x;sa** mijksdr lwpuk fnukad vusdtj ih& ;gfd] ftyk fuokzpu vf/kdkjh y[kuå ls lwpuk ds vf/kdkj ds rgr tkudkjh ekaxh xbz i= fnukad esa pkgh xbz tkudkjh &^,- xr yksdlhkk pqukhk esa tuin&y[kuå esa fofhkuu LFkkuksa ij yxh gqbz gkffk;ksa dh ewfrzp;ksa dks <ds tkus dk gokyk nsrs gq;s dk myys[k fd;k x;k yksdlhkk pquko esa ewfrz;ksa dks <dus laca/kh Hkkjr fuokzpu vk;ksx ds i= dh izekf.kr izfrfyfia** ch- ^^ftyk fuokzpu vf/kdkjh y[kuå }kjk o kz 2014 esa yksdlhkk pquko esa dh xbz gkfkh dh ewfrz;ksa ds laca/kh Qkby ftlesa ewfrz;ksa dks <dus ij gq;s O;; dh tkudkjh lfgr leiw.kz QkbyA** ^^tckc& miyc/k vfhkys[kksa esa okafnr lwpuk miyc/k ugh ** mijksdr lwpuk fnukad vusdtj ih& ;gfd] ftyk fuokzpu vf/kdkjh xksrecq)uxj ls lwpuk ds vf/kdkj ds rgr tkudkjh ekaxh xbz i= fnukad esa pkgh xbz tkudkjh& ^^mdr vkosnu i= ds }kjk Hkkjr fuokzpu vk;ksx] ubz fnyyh ds i= la[;k 1- xksrecq) fo o fo/kky; yxhkx 2 fd-eh- 2- lwjtiqj,uvªh ikwbuv yxhkx 15 fd-eh- 3- MkW- Hkhejko vecsmdj ikdz cknyiqj yxhkx 700 ehvj 4- xksrecq) ikdz cknyiqj yxhkx 700 ehvj 5- uks,mk ikdz yxhkx 1 fd-eh- 474@;wilh&,y,@2012 fnukad ds vuqikyu esa ftyk fuokzpu vf/kdkjh] xksrecq)uxj ds i= la[;k 355 fnukad esa of.kzr LFky tgka ij gkfkh dh ewfrz;ksa dks <dk x;k] ml LFkku ls ernku dsunzksa dh nwjh laca/kh tkudkjh pkgh xbz okafnr lwpuk fueukuqlkj izsf kr 25

26 mijksdr lwpuk fnukad vusdtj ih& ;gfd] ftyk fuokzpu vf/kdkjh y[kuå ls lwpuk ds vf/kdkj ds rgr tkudkjh ekaxh xbz i= fnukad esa pkgh xbz tkudkjh& ^^,- Hkkjr fuokzpu vk;ksx ubz fnyyh ds i= fnukad ds vuqikyu esa <dh xbz gkffk;ksa dh ewfrz;ksa y[kuå es mdr ewfrz;ksa ls ernku dsunz dh nwjh ds laca/k esa tkudkjha ch- dk;kzy; y[kuå fodkl izkf/kdkj.k ds i=kad fnukad esa of.kzr LFkyksa ij cuh gqbz gkfkh dh ewfrz;ksa dks <dus ds laca/k esa nh xbz tkudkjh ds vuqlkj mdr LFkyksa ls ernku dsunzksa dh nwjha** ^^tckc & miyc/k vfhkys[kksa ds vk/kkj ij okafnr lwpuk miyc/k ugha ** mijksdr lwpuk fnukad vusdtj ih& ;gfd] Hkkjr fuokzpu vk;ksx ls lwpuk ds vf/kdkj ds rgr tkudkjh ekaxh xbz i= fnukad esa pkgh xbz tkudkjh& ^^Hkkjr fuokzpu vk;ksx }kjk fu;qdr yhxy,mokbtj Jh,l-ds- esanhjùkk dks o kz 2002 esa fu;qdr fd;s x;s vkns k dh izekf.kr izfrfyfia** & ^^ Shri Sayan Chatterjee Dueputy Election Commissioner Order dated Election Commission of India appoints Shri S.K Mendiratta, Resident of 17/30, Tilak Nagar, New Delhi , as Legal Counsel in the Commission w.e.f , for a period of one year on the terms and conditions mentioned below- 1. That from to , he will be paid a consolidatede sum of Rs. 10,800/- p.m. 2. That he will be provided with the facility of a telephone in the officer and at his residence and transport for pick up and droppoing at residence for the duration of his appointment. yhxy,mokbtj dk fu;qfdr vkns k fnukad ,oa tkudkjh i= fnukad vusdtj ih& ;gfd] Hkkjr fuokzpu vk;ksx }kjk mrrjizns k fo/kku lhkk o kz 2012 gsrq fnukad dks tkjh vkns k ds vuqlkj mrrjizns k esa gkfkh dh ewfrz;ksa dks fnukad kke 5 cts <dus dh mijksdr vkns k ds laca/k esa Hkkjr fuokzpu vk;ksx dh yhxy,mokbtj Jh,l-ds- esanhjrk ls dksbz Hkh fof/kd lykg ugha yh xbz u gh lokszpp U;k;ky; }kjk gkfkh dh ewfrz;ksa dks <ds tkus ds laca/k es dksbz vkns k tkjh ugha fd;k x;ka mijksdr vkns k fuokzpu vk;ksx }kjk Hkkjrh; lafo/kku ds vuqpnsn 14 dk gokyk nsrs gq;s vius in,oa drzo;ksa dks nq:i;ksx djrs gq;s dh xbz 90- ;gfd] Hkkjr fuokzpu vk;ksx ls lwpuk ds vf/kdkj ds rgr tkudkjh ekaxh xbz i= fnukad esa pkgh xbz tkudkjh & 1- Hkkjr fuokzpu vk;ksx fuokzpu lnu ubz fnyyh ds ;gka lwpuk fnukad dks fdrus ernkrk gs] dh la[;k tkudkjh dh izekf.kr izfrfyfia 2- Hkkjr fuokzpu vk;ksx fuokzpu lnu ubz fnyyh ds ;gka lwpuk fnukad dks efgyk,oa iq: k ernkrkvksa dh la[;k laca/kh tkudkjh dh izekf.kr izfrfyfia 3- Hkkjr fuokzpu vk;ksx fuokzpu lnu ubz fnyyh }kjk fof/k lykgkdkj gsrq fu;qdr vf/kdkjh o,moksdsv ds uke o mudks fn;s tkus okyk osru o vu; ykhk laca/kh tkudkjha 4- Hkkjr fuokzpu vk;ksx fuokzpu lnu ubz fnyyh }kjk o kz 2009 ls 2017 rd Hkkjr fuokzpu vk;ksx esa fu;qdr o vf/kd`r fd;s x;s,moksdsv~l (Legal Advisor) dh fu;qfdr laca/kh tkudkjha 5- Hkkjr fuokzpu vk;ksx fuokzpu lnu ubz fnyyh }kjk fof/kd ekeyksa esa yh xbz lykg o vk;ksx dks Hksts x;s vkosnuksa ij laca/kh o kz 2012 ls o kz 2017 rd Hksts x;s lelr vkosnuksa Legal Advisor dks fohkkx ds fof/k lykgkdkj }kjk fn;s x;s gs] mu lelr i=ksa dh izekf.kr izfrfyfia 26 fnukad dks izdkf kr ernkrk lwph ds vafre izdk ku ds le; ernkrkvksa dh la[;k fuokzpu vk;ksx ds osclkbv ij miyc/k gs ftldk fyad pdf Jh,l-ds- esanhjrrk o kz 2002 ls vk;ksx esa Legal Advisor ds in ij dk;zjr orzeku esa fof/k lykgkdkj dks fn;s tkus okys osru,oa vu; ykhk laca/kh vk;ksx ds vkns k la[;k 509@Legal Advisor/2016/JS 1/RCC fnukad layxu mijksdr ds vykok] bl laca/k esa vk;ksx }kjk tkjh orzeku esa vkns k la[;k 509@Gen/ECI/ORDER/FUN/JUD/2017 fnukad layxu lwpuk ladfyr :i esa miyc/k ugha mijksdr lwpuk fnukad vusdtj ih& ;gfd] Hkkjr fuokzpu vk;ksx ls lwpuk ds vf/kdkj ds rgr tkudkjh ekaxh xbz i= fnukad esa pkgh xbz tkudkjh & 1- Hkkjr fuokzpu vk;ksx] ubz fnyyh }kjk lacaf/kr QkbZy vk;ksx esa dkqh iz;klksa ds fnukad dks ikfjr vkns k dh ckotwn [kksth ugha tk ldh tsls gh QkbZy leiw.kz Qkby uksv khv o nlrkost lfgr miyc/k gksxh] vkidks lwpuk Hkst nh tk;sxha izekf.kr izfrfyfia

27 2- Hkkjr fuokzpu vk;ksx] ubz fnyyh }kjk fnukad dks ikfjr vkns k ds iwoz vk;ksx }kjk ekuuh; egkf/kodrk lokszpp U;k;ky; ubz fnyyh ls yh xbz fof/kd lykg gsrq Hkssts x;s i=ksa dh izekf.kr izfrfyfia 3- Hkkjr fuokzpu vk;ksx] ubz fnyyh }kjk fnukad dks ikfjr vkns k ds iwoz vk;ksx }kjk Legal Advisor egkf/kodrk lokszpp U;k;ky; ubz fnyyh ls yh xbz fof/kd lykg gsrq Hksts x;s i=ksa dh izekf.kr izfrfyfia mijksdr lwpuk fnukad vusdtj ih& ;gfd] Hkkjr fuokzpu vk;ksx ls lwpuk ds vf/kdkj ds rgr tkudkjh ekaxh xbz i= fnukad esa pkgh xbz tkudkjh & 1- Hkkjr fuokzpu vk;ksx }kjk bafm;u us kuy QkbZy 56@06@1981 vhkh vk;ksx esa [kksth ugha dkaxzsl ikvhz ¼vkbZ½ dks vkwmzj fnukad tk ldha 1981 dks ikfjr vkns k ds vuqlkj vkxkeh yksdlhkk easa ikvhz dks Hand fpug vkcavu ds laca/k esa vu; ikfvz;ksa }kjk dh xbz vkifrr dh izekf.kr izfrfyfia 2- yksdlhkk o kz 1981,oa o kz 1985 esa bafm;u us kuy dkaxzsl ikvhz ¼vkbZ½ }kjk ^^Hand** fuokzpu izrhd ij fuokzpu ym+k x;k] ijarq Hand ds LFkku ij gkfk o gkfk ds iats dk fuokzpu fpug ds :i esa mi;ksx fd;k x;ka gkfk o gkfk ds iats ds laca/k esa 1981 ls 1998 rd jktuhfrd nyksa }kjk nh xbz vkifrr dh izekf.kr izfrfyfia 27 miyc/k ughaa mijksdr lwpuk fnukad vusdtj ih& ;gfd] Hkkjr fuokzpu vk;ksx ls lwpuk ds vf/kdkj ds rgr tkudkjh ekaxh xbz i= fnukad esa pkgh xbz tkudkjh & 1- leiw.kz QkbZy ftl ij ls fuokzpu vk;ksx }kjk dkqh iz;klksa ds ckotwn [kksth ugha tk ldh fnukad dk vkns k ikfjr fd;k x;k gs fd leiw.kz nlrkost lfgr QkbZy dh izfra mijksdr lwpuk fnukad vusdtj ih& ;gfd] o kz 2017 esa mrrjizns k fo/kku lhkk pquko ds laca/k esa lekpkj if=dk fnukad esa izdkf kr lekpkj i= & pquko vk;ksx ls ekaxh o kz 2012 fo/kkulhkk pquko dh rjg bl ckj Hkh ch-,l-ih- ds flecy dks <dus dh ekax & bl ckjs esa izrki punzk us dgk fd lafo/kku }kjk lhkh ukxfjdksa dks lekurk dk vf/kdkj fn;k x;k yksdra= dk igyk ik;nku pquko gs volj dh lekurk vksj Ýh,aM Qs;j pquko ds fl)kar ij pquko vkpkj lafgrk ykxw gksus ds 5 fnu ckn Hkh mrrjizns k ds reke ikdksz esa cgqtu lektoknh ikvhz ds pquko fpug gkfkh dh ewfrz;ka yxh gs tks ifcyd Iysl gs ftlesa fujarj ikvhz ds pquko fpug gkfkh dk izpkj izlkj gksrk fygktk gkfkh dh ewfrz;ksa dks rrdky <dk tk;sa bl fo k; ij vk;ksx us fnyyh gkbzdksvz dh fvii.kh vksj gkbzdksvz ds lq>ko ij dks ykqqy Mk;jsD ku No. 56/4 LET/ECI/FUNC/PP/PPS-II/2015 cuk;k FkkA izrki panzk us dgk fd 2012 esa gq;s fo/kkulhkk pquko esa Hkh pquko vk;ksx }kjk mrrjizns k ds reke ikdksz esa cgqtu lekt ikvhz ds pquko&fpug gkfkh ds LVspw dks <dok;k x;k FkkA ysfdu 2014 esa gq;s yksdlhkk pquko esa bu gkfkh ds ewfrz;ksa dks ugha <dok;k x;k FkkA ftl ij vk;ksx ls u <dokus dk dkj.k iwnus ij vk;ksx us crk;k Fkk fd fdlh us vkifrr ugha dh FkhA blfy;s yksdlhkk pquko esa gkffk;ksa dks ugha <dok;k x;k FkkA fnukad if=dk lekpkj i= dh izfr vusdtj ih& ;gfd],umhvhoh U;wt gkffk;ksa dh izfrekvksa dks <ds tkus dh lahkkouk laca/kh loky ij dgk] ^^bl fo k; ij mppre Up;k;ky; funsz k ns pqdk gs] geus mlls Øe esa dqn funsz k fn;s gs] ;g fo k; vc vko ;d dk;zokgh ds fy;s vk;ksx ds lakku esa ugha ** gkykafd mugksus Li V ugha fd;k fd bl ckjs esa mppre U;k;ky; us D;k funsz k fn;s Fks vksj muds Øe vk;ksx us D;k funsz k fn;s,umhvhoh U;wt dh izfr vusdtj ih& ;gfd] lwpuk ds vf/kdkj ds rgr vk;ksx ls vkidks tkudkjh i= fnukad esa nh xbz tkudkjh ds vuqlkj mrrjizns k fo/kkulhkk fuokzpu 2017 ds fy;s tkjh vkn kz vkpkj lafgrk ds fn kk funsz k vk;ksx dh csolkbzv ij miyc/k gs ftldk ;w-vkj-y pdf esa

28 tkudkjh nh gsaa ijarq o kz 2017 ds ;w-ih- fo/kkulhkk fuokzpu esa vkfvzdy 14,oa lokszpp U;k;ky; ds vkns k dk ikyu o kz 2012 dh rjg fuokzpu vk;ksx }kjk ugha fd;k x;ka mijksdr i= fnukad dh izfr vusdtj ih& ;gfd] Hkkjr fuokzpu vk;ksx ls fnukad dks pkgh xbz tkudkjh &^^1- Hkkjr fuokzpu vk;ksx] fuokzpu Hkou] ubz fnyyh }kjk bafm;u us kuy dkaxzsl ikvhz dks 1981 esa vlfkkbz :i ls vkacfvr gkfk dk iatk fuokzpu fpug fd;s tkus ds fo:) lokszpp U;k;ky;] mpp U;k;ky; esa fdlh O;fDr ;k jktuhfrd lalfkk }kjk izlrqr dh xbz ;kfpdk ds laca/k esa tkudkjh o mdr ;kfpdk esa ikfjr fu.kz; dh izfra ftlesa fuokzpu vk;ksx Hkkjr ljdkj dks funsz k] vkns k fn;s x;s gksa] dh izekf.kr izfrfyfia tckc& bl laca/k esa pquko vk;ksx ds ikl lwpuk miyc/k ugha gs fd mdr ;kfpdk;sa fdl fdl U;k;ky; esa nk;j dh xbz gs ;k ughaa 2- o kz 1981 ls vkt fnukad rd vkcafvr pquko fpug gkfk ds iats dks fujlr djus gsrq fdlh O;fDr] lalfkk ;k jktuhfrd ny }kjk vk;ksx dks Hksts x;s lelr vkosnuksa dh izekf.kr izfrfyfi,oa vk;ksx }kjk mdr vkosnuksa ds tckc dh izekf.kr izfrfyfi;kaa tckc& izekf.kr izfrfyfi vk;ksx esa ladfyr :i ls miyc/k ugha 3- Jh vkj- ds- JhokLro izeq[k lfpo] Hkkjr fuokzpu vk;ksx] fuokzpu Hkou] ubz fnyyh }kjk i= Øekad 464@;wih&,y,@ 2012@198&199 fnukad tks eq[; lfpo mrrjizns k ljdkj y[kuå dks Hkstk x;k mdr i= ds ikyu esa mrrj izns k ljdkj }kjk dh xbz dk;zokgh ds fo:) O;fDr;ksa }kjk] lalfkk] jktuhfrd }kjk vk;ksx dks mdr vkns k ds fo:) Hksts x;s vkosnuksa dh izekf.kr izfrfyfia tckc& izekf.kr izfrfyfi vk;ksx esa ladfyr :i ls miyc/k ugha mijksdr i= vusdtj ih& ;gfd] Hkkjr fuokzpu vk;ksx ls fnukad dks pkgh xbz tkudkjh& ^^o kz 2017 fo/kkulhkk fuokzpu mrrjizns k] mrrjk[k.m] ef.kiqj] iatkc vksj xksok osclkbv orzeku eqìs vksj izsl fokfir kh kzd ds varxzr miyc/k gs vksj ftldk ifk ** ^^mrrjizns k ds vke pquko 2017 esa ewfrz;ksa dks <dus ds lanhkz esa eq[; fuokzpu vf/kdkj ds i= dk fopkj djrs gq;s vk;ksx us ;g fu.kz; fy;s gs fd bl ckj bl ekeys dksbz Hkh funsz k tkjh djus dh vko ;drk ugha mijksdr i= fnukad dh izfr vusdtj ih& ;gfd] e;ad nqcs,moksdsv Q:kZ[kkckn ;w-ih- }kjk fnukad dks fuokzpu vk;ksx dks jk Vªh; dkaxzsl ikvhz ds >ams,oa fuokzpu fpug iats dks fujlr djus ds laca/k esa i= fn;k x;ka ftldk tckc fuokzpu vk;ksx ds vamj lsøsvjh izeksn dqekj kekz }kjk,d o kz ckn fnukad dks tckc fn;ka Freezing of Election Symbols depicting Animals & Birds and censure on Indian National Congress Flag Regarding. Your letter dated on the subject cited above and to state that as regardds the flag of Indian National Congress, your attention is invited to the Order dated of the Hon ble Supreme Court is SLP No. 6197/2004(B. Krishna Bhatt Vs. UOI and Ors.). In addittion to above, you are also informed that the Commission has already taken a decision not to allot any symbol depicting animal and bird in future. So far as the existing symbols reserved by the political parties is concerned, it has been, directed to all these parties tko ensure that no cruclty should be meted out to these animals being reserved as the election symbol. mijksdr i= fnukad dh izfr vusdtj ih& ;gfd] dsyk k flag iks;k ljxqtk NRrhlx<+ }kjk fnukad dks ekuuh; okbz-,l- dqjs kh eq[; fuokzpu vk;qdr dks i= fy[kk fd&^^vf[ky Hkkjrh; dkaxzsl desvh dk pquko fpug iatk ds ifjn` ; dh oklrq flfkfr esa iatk dks izfrca/k djus ds laca/k esaa eq[; fuokzpu vk;ksx ds l[r vkns kkuqlkj dksbz Hkh pquko fpug ernku dsunz ds 100 ehvj vanj o ckgj dh nwjh ds LFkku ij ugha jguk pkfg;s rks,sls izrhd fpug iatk iwoz ds fuokzpu vk;ksx }kjk D;ksa nh xbz vksj orzeku pquko vk;ksx }kjk fdlh izdkj dk bl lppkbz dk v/;;u dj izfrca/k ugha fd;k x;k tks kjhj dk vax gs vksj kjhj ds vaxks dks fdlh izdkj ls jksdk ugha tk ldrk] izn kzu ernku dsunz ds vunj o ckgj rd gksrk ernku dsunz ds 100 ehvj ds vanj jktuhfr ikfvz;ksa dk ikslvj ikweiysv o pquko fpug fdlh Hkh izdkj dk gks rks mls 100 ehvj ds ckgj dj fn;k tkrk gs] ysfdu pquko fpug iatk ernku dsunz ds 100 ehvj vanj ds vklikl jgrk fqj Hkh ml ij dk;zokgh ugha dh tkrh jk Vªh; dh,d ek= vf[ky Hkkjrh; dkaxzsl ikvhz dk pquko fpug iatk gs tks ekuo kjhj dk vax gksus dh otg ls ernku dsunz esa miflfkr dakxzsl leffkzr fopkj/kkjk ds dkaxzslh dezpkjh o dkaxzslh dk;zdrkz gks ;k dkaxzslh iksfyax cqfk,tsav ernku dsunz ds vanj ernku dsunz ls ernku dj ernku Hkou ls fudyrs odr drkj esa [km+s ernkrkvksa dks gkfk fgykdj iatk pquko fpug dh vksj bafxr dj bz kkjk fd;k tkrk gs bl rjg ds fuokzpu vk;ksx ds ldr dkuwu o vkns k dk ikyu u dj fu;eksa dks rkd ij j[kdj ljs vke myya?ku fd;k tkrk vf[ky Hkkjrh; dkaxzsl desvh pquko fpug iatk dk nq:i;ksx dj dkaxzsl ikvhz dks jktuhfr dk Hkz V utk;t ykhk igqapkrk ns k ds lhkh jktuhfr ikfvz;ksa ds fy;s leku vf/kdkj izkir gs ;k ge tura= esa fo okl djrs gs] fuokzpu vk;ksx,d Loar= o fu i{k vk;ksx gs ftl ij ge lhkh dks iw.kz vklfkk gs] vf[ky Hkkjrh; dkaxzsl desvh pquko fpug iatk ds ifjn` ; dh olrq flfkfr ds lanhkz esa esjs er ds flfkfr dk voyksdu dj tckc,d ekg ds vanj nsus dh dìk djsaa fujkdj.k ugha djus dh flfkfr esa U;k;ky; dh kj.k esa tkus ds fy;s ck/; jgwaxka** mijksdr i= fnukad dh izfr vusdtj ih& ;gfd] Jherh Hkkjrh kkl=h,moksdsv Hkksiky }kjk vius i{kdkj ;ksxs k ekyoh; ds crk;s vuqlkj Hkkjr fuokpzu vk;ksx dks Hksts x;s uksfvl fnukad ds vuqlkj&1- Hkkjrh; jk Vªh; dkaxzsl ikvhz dks fnukad dks vk;ksx ds vkns kkuqlkj ^^gkfk dk iatk** pquko fpug iznku fd;k x;k gs] 2- vkn kz vkpkj lafgrk esa fu/kkzfjr fl)karksa ds vuq:i ernku dsunz ds 100 ehvj dh ifjf/k esa fdlh Hkh izdkj ls pquko dk izpkj djuk oftzr gs vksj 28

29 u fdlh Hkh pquko ds Lyksxu ;k fu kku dk izn kzu fd;k tk ldrk gs] 3- vkpkj lafgrk ds funsz kksa ds foijhr ^^gkfk ds iats** dk izn kzu gj ernku dsunz ij gksrk tsls dh iksfyax cwfk dsunz ij inlfk ikvhz dk,tsav vius ^^iats** ls ernkrkvksa dks ^^iats** dk [;ky j[kus dk izn kzu dj ldrk gs] 4- Hkkjrh; jk Vªh; dkaxzsl ikvhz dh Hkkouk ;k fl)karksa ls izhkkfor iksfyax cwfk ij inlfk dezpkjh] vaxqyh ij L;kgh yxkus okyk dezpkjh iats dk [;ky j[kus dk dgsxk] bl lahkkouk ls badkj ugha fd;k tk ldrk gs] 5- o kz 1978 dks igys dhkh Hkh fdlh ekuo vax dk pquko fpug fdlh Hkh ny dks vkacfvr ugha fd;k x;k] 6- o kz 1978 esa tc Hkkjrh; jk Vªh; dkaxzsl ikvhz dks ^^gkfk dk iatk** pquko fpug vkcafvr fd;k x;k Fkk],slk izrhr gksrk gs fd mlds lahkkfor nq:i;ksx ij fopkj ugha fd;k x;k] 7- bl fpag ds vkcavu ds iwoz blh ikvhz dk pquko fpug ^^tq,;qdr nks csyks dh tksm+h** FkkA ;fn ;gh fu kku uoxfbr ny dks fn;k tkrk rks tku ekul ds euksa esa tks kadk;sa mb jgh gs os ugha mbrha mijksdr uksfvl fnukad dh izfr vusdtj ih& ;gfd] Jherh Hkkjrh kkl=h,moksdsv Hkksiky }kjk vius i{kdkj ;ksxs k ekyoh; ds crk;s vuqlkj Hkkjr fuokpzu vk;ksx dks Hksts x;s uksfvl dk tckc Hkkjr fuokzpu vk;ksx ds vamj lsøsvjh Jh izeksn dqekj kekz }kjk fnukad ds vuqlkj& Freezing of Election Symbol of Indian National Congress Regarding. Letter received in the Commission on dated on the subject cited above and to state that the symbol Hand has been the reserved symbol of the Indian National Congress for almost three decades. It was an election symbol even before it was allotted to the Indian National Congress. Just because Hand is a part of the human body, it is not sufficient enough reason to object to it as an election symbol. There are several other election symbols which represent articles of daily use found in or around the polling station, such as the ceiling fan, table, chair, stool, clock, inkpot & pen, cupo & sauccer and key etc. If any symbol is misused inside the polloing station for soliciting votes, there are provisions to deal with such offences. tckc i= fnukad tks vusdtj ih& ;gfd] Jh Nh:yky dqegkj chdkusj }kjk fnukad dks Hkkjr fuokzpu vk;ksx dks i= Hkstk x;ka ftldk tckc fuokzpu vk;ksx ds vamj lsøsvjh Jh izeksn dqekj kekz }kjk fnukad ds vuqlkj & Freezing of Election Symbol of Indian National Congress Regarding. Letter dated on the subject cited above and to state that the symbol Hand has been the reserved symbol of the Indian National Congress for almost three decades. It was an election symbol even before it was allotted to the Indian National Congress. Just because Hand is a part of the human body, it is not sufficient enough reason to object to it as an election symbol. There are several other election symbols which represent articles of daily use found in or around the polling station, such as the ceiling fan, table, chair, stool, clock, inkpot & pen, cupo & sauccer and key etc. If any symbol is misused inside the polloing station for soliciting votes, there are provisions to deal with such offences. tckc i= fnukad tks vusdtj ih& ;gfd] Jh eqds k pksgku ftyk lhgksj e-iz- }kjk fnukad vksj dks Hkkjr fuokzpu vk;ksx dks i= Hkstk x;ka ftldk tckc fuokzpu vk;ksx ds vamj lsøsvjh Jh izeksn dqekj kekz }kjk fnukad ds vuqlkj & Freezing of Election Symbol of Indian National Congress Regarding. Letter dated & on the subject cited above and to state that the symbol Hand has been the reserved symbol of the Indian National Congress for almost three decades. It was an election symbol even before it was allotted to the Indian National Congress. Just because Hand is a part of the human body, it is not sufficient enough reason to object to it as an election symbol. There are several other election symbols which represent articles of daily use found in or around the polling station, such as the ceiling fan, table, chair, stool, clock, inkpot & pen, cupo & sauccer and key etc. If any symbol is misused inside the polloing station for soliciting votes, there are provisions to deal with such offences. tckc i= fnukad tks vusdtj ih& ;gfd] Jh eqds k pksgku ftyk lhgksj e-iz- }kjk fnukad dks fof/k fo/kk;h fohkkx Hkkjr ljdkj dks Hkstk x;k ftlds vuqlkj& ^^fcgkj pquko ls iwoz yksd izfrfuf/kro 1951 dh /kkjk 130 ds ¼M½ vuqlkj ernku fnol izfrcaf/kr lhek esa fueu pquko fpugksa dk [kqyk izn kzu jksdus ckcr~ iquzfopkj dj ns k fgr esa fu.kz; ysus ckcr~ fuosnu i=& ekuuh; vk;ksx ds le{k vkosnd }kjk pquko vk;ksx }kjk ns; pquko fpugksa ls ernku fnol ernku dsunz,oa lks ehvj dh ijhf/k esa fdlh u fdlh :i esa mdr fpugksa }kjk yksd izfrfuf/kro 1951 dh /kkjk 130 ¼M½ esa of.kzr vk k; ds fo:) [kqyk izn kzu gksus ds dkj.k fu i{k,oa Lora= ernku izhkkfor gksus ls vu; meehnokjksa,oa Hkkjrh; tu ekul ds lkfk HksnHkko gksrk Hkkjrh; lafo/kku,oa pquko vk;ksx }kjk fufezr fu;eksa dh e;kznk] vknj leeku] fu i{krk cuk j[kus gsrq iquzfopkj dj fu.kz; ysus ckcr~a** mijksdr i= fnukad vusdtj ih& ;gfd] Jh eqds k pksgku ftyk lhgksj e-iz- }kjk fnukad dks fof/k fo/kk;h fohkkx Hkkjr ljdkj dks Hkstk x;k mijksdr i= ds vk/kkj ij v/kh{kd fof/k Hkkjr ljdkj }kjk lfpo fuokzpu vk;ksx dks mijksdr i= ds laca/k esa fy[kk x;k fd & ^^ yksd izfrfuf/kro vf/kfu;e 1951 dh /kkjk 130 ds myya?ku ds laca/k esa izkir izfrosnua Jh eqds k pksgku dk izfrosnu rkjh[k 27 flrecj 2010 ewy :i esa mfpr dk;zokgh gsrq vxzlkfjr djus dk funsz k gqvk blds lkfk ;g vuqjks/k fd;k tkrk gs fd izfrosnu ij dh xbz dk;zokgh ls vkosnd dks lh/ks voxr djk;k tk;,oa mldh,d izfr bl fohkkx dks lwpukfkz izsf kr dh tk;a mijksdr i= fnukad vusdtj ih&107 29

30 107- ;gfd] Jh vjfoan kkjnk tya/kj flvh }kjk fnukad dks Hkkjr fuokzpu vk;ksx dks i= Hkstk x;ka ftldk tckc fuokzpu vk;ksx ds vamj lsøsvjh Jh izeksn dqekj kekz }kjk fnukad ds vuqlkj & Derecognition of Indian National Congress and National Congress Party Regarding. Letter date on the subject cited above and to state that recognition and derecognition of Political partices entirely depend upon the poll performance of political parties and para 16A of the Election Symbol (Reservation & Allotment) Order, As regarding the flag of Indian National Congress, your attention is invited to the Order dated of Hon ble Supreme Court in SLP No. 6195/2004 (B.Krishna Bhatt Vs. UOI & Ors.). Therefore, your request cannot be maintained under the ground mentioned under your petition.. tckc i= fnukad tks vusdtj ih& ;gfd] dsyk k flag iks;k ljxqtk NRrhlx<+ }kjk fnukad dks ekuuh; okbz-,l- dqjs kh eq[; fuokzpu vk;qdr dks i= fy[kk x;k ftldk tckc Hkkjr fuokzpu vk;ksx ds Shri Varinder Kumar Secretary }kjk fnukad dks fn;s x;s tckc esa fy[kk x;k fd & Freezing of Election Symbol of Indian National Congress Regarding. Letter dated on the subject cited above and to state that the symbol Hand has been the reserved symbol of the Indian National Congress for almost three decades. It was an election symbol even before it was allotted to the Indian National Congress. Just because Hand is a part of the human body, it is not sufficient enough reason to object to it as an election symbol. There are several other election symbols which represent articles of daily use found in or around the polling station, such as the ceiling fan, table, chair, stool, clock, inkpot & pen, cupo & sauccer and key etc. If any symbol is misused inside the polloing station for soliciting votes, there are provisions to deal with such offences. tckc i= fnukad tks vusdtj ih& ;gfd] vkj-vkbz- dsu tujy lsøsvjh fnyyh ds vuqlkj fnukad dks fn;s x;s i=& Derecognition of Indian National Congress and National Congress Party Regarding. Letter date on the subject cited above. Your attention is invited to the judgement dated of the Hon ble Supreme Court in civil appeal Nos /2001 (Indian National Congress (1) Vs. Institute of Social Welfare and Ors) ( SCC 685).. tckc i= fnukad tks vusdtj ih& ;gfd] uohu ok;-,l- csaxyksj }kjk bz&esy ls fnukad dks fn;s x;s vkosnu esa Hkkjr fuokzpu vk;ksx dks Hkstk x;k ftlesa & The State Election Commission rightly removed fans (Fan, was the party symbol of BSR Congress) from the voting centres. Which would ve either been unfairly misused by the polling officers of the party concerned to coerce the voter in the polling booth. I find it ironical that the Congress party symbol of hand, which (like the fan ) can be either misused by the polling officers or the party concerned to coerce the voter unfairly in the polling booth, has not been scrutinized and looked into, by the Election Commission for all these years. I request yoy to temporarily stay the unfair use of hand as the Congress party symbol in the coming legislative assembly elections of Karnataka and provided for a permanent solution before the LoK Sabha elections in vkosnu i= fnukad tks vusdtj ih& ;gfd] ds-lh- ferry lsøsvjh yhxy,am gqeu jkbzv~l fmikvzesav }kjk fnukad dks fy[ks i= eq[; fuokzpu vk;ksx Hkkjr ljdkj dks fn;s x;s ftlesa fy[kk x;k fd & Indian National Congress was granted Hand symbol by order by the then Chief Election Commissioner of India, Shri S.L. Sakhdher. The same is also notified in the Gazette of India giving details of the recognized national party and the symbol reserved. I will be highly obliged and greatful if you would kindly help us to provide the copies of the gazette notifications issued in this regard along with the copy of the initial notification and the subsequent notifications. tckc i= fnukad tks vusdtj ih& ;gfd] dsyk k pksgku banksj }kjk eq[; vk;qdr fuokzpu vk;ksx jkt; fuokzpu vk;ksx] ftyk fuokzpu vf/kdkjh banksj dks fnukad dks Hksts x;s vius i= esa fy[kk x;k fd & ^^Hkkjrh; jk Vªh; dkaxzsl ikvhz dk pquko fpug ^^iatk** o jk Vªh; >.Mk dk fpug cnydj] nwljk dksbz vu; fpug nsus ckcr~a fuokzpu vkpkj lafgrk ds fu;eksa ds vuqlkj tc Hkh ernku gksrk gs rc ernku dsunz dh 200 ehvj dh ifjf/k esa vxj fdlh Hkh jktuhfrd ny dk >.Mk csuj ;k pquko fpug ^^dvvkmv** ;k vu; izdkj dh izpkj lkexzh gkvkbz tkrh gs vksj ernku dsunz ds vanj Hkh LVhsdj] fcyys] dkmz vkfn vanj ugha ts tkus fn;k tkrk gsaa ijarq dkaxzsl dk pquko fpug ^^iatk** ekuo vax eas ges kk jgrk gksdj og fuokzpu vkpkj lafgrk dk myya?ku djrk gqvk dkuwu dk;nksa dks rkd esa j[k ernku dh isvh rd ^^csysv isij** rd ;k oksfvax e khu rd ^^iatk** ygjk;k tkrk gksdj ^^eqd** b kkjs ls dkaxzsl ikvhz dk izpkj tkjh jgrk esus dbz ckj fuokzpu vf/kdkjh dks dgk fd dkaxzsl ds,tsav gkfk dk b kkjk dj ernkrkvksa o ernku dks izhkkfor djrs gs rks fuokzpu vf/kdkjh us dgk fd ^^D;k bldk gkfk dk iatk dkv nw D;k\**,slh flfkfr esa dkaxzsl dk pquko fpug gkfk dk iatk gksus ls tc Hkh fuokzpu gksrk gs o iatk pquko fpug gksus ls lgh fuokzpu ugha gksrk blh izdkj Hkkjrh; jk Vªh; dkaxzsl dk >.Mk Hkh jk Vªh; /ot ds leku gh frjaxk gs ftlesa ^^v kksd pø** dh txg gkfk dk iatk fpug yxk;k gs tks jk Vªh; /ot dk vieku dkaxzsl ds mdr pquko fpug ls vke turk izhkkfor gksrh gksdj] mdr pquko fpug ls fuokzpu izhkkfor gksdj U;k; dh LoLFk ijeijk ds eqrkfcd lgh fuokzpu ugha gksrk gksdj fuokzpu izfø;k dk nq:i;ksx gksrk dkaxzsl ds mdr pquko fpug ls dbz ckj >xm+k] v kkafr dh flfkfr;ka fufezr gqbza dbz ckj Hkkjrh; turk ikvhz ds iksfyax,tsav gksus ds dkj.k eq>s dkaxzsl ds pquko fpug ^^iatk** dk izpkj ernku LFky rd gksrk jgrk gs gksus ls vkrexykuh gksrh 30

31 gksdj Hkkjh ekufld Dys k gksrk mdr flfkfr esa ^^dkaxzsl** dk pquko fpug o /oy cnyuk U;k;ksfpr vr% Jhekueku ls fouez fuosnu gs fd mdr flfkfr esa dkaxzsl dk pquko fpug ^^iatk o /ot rrdky cnyus ckcr~ vkns k gksosa ;gh fuosnu dsyk k pksgku banksj dk i= fnukad vusdtj ih& ;gfd] Hkkjr fuokzpu vk;ksx ds izhafliy lsøsvjh Jh ds- vt; dqekj }kjk fnukad dks izeq[k lfpo xozuesav vkwq xqtjkr xka/kh uxj,oa iqfyl egkfunsz kd xqtjkr] xka/kh uxj,oa phq bysd ku vkwfqlj xqtjkr dks Hksts x;s i= esa orzeku iz/kkuea=h Jh ujsunz eksnh ds fo:) vijk/k iathc) fd;s tkus gsrq fy[kk x;k tks fd& Violation of Provisions of Section 126 of R.P. Act 1951 by sh. Narendra Modi & Others regarding. The commission has seen the video recording of the address by sh. Narendra Modi at a meeting in Ahmedabad after he cast his vote today ( ) in the morning. From the substance, tone and tenor of the address made by sh. Modi and the statements made by him and the manner in which the symbol Lotus of the BJP was being displayed by him at the said meet, thereby displaying to the public election matter by means of television in polling areas going to polls todat it is evident that the said address was in the nature of political speech intended and calculated to influence and affect the result of elections in the constituencies going to polls today, not only in Ahmandabad but also in all over constiuencies in the State of Gujrat and elsewhere in the country. The commission is of the view that by holding that meeting and also by addressing the same today when the polling is going on in the entire State of Gujrat and in different parts of the country, sh. Narendra Modi has violated the provisions of Section 126 (1) (a) and 126 (1) (b) of R.P. Act Therefore, the Commission directs under Article 324 of the Constitution and all other legal provisions enabling it in this behalf that complaints/fir as the case may be, should be filed against sh. Narendra Modi and all Others who were involved in the convening and holding of the said meeting under the provisions of Sections 126 (1) (a) and 126(1) (b). Further, if any restrictions have been imposed by the competent authority in Ahmadabad under section 144 of CrPC, then complaints/fir should also be made under Section 188 of IPC. The Commission further directs that all the TV channels and other electronic media which carried the proceedings/images of the said meeting and display of election matter (as defined in section 126(3) of R.P. Act, 1951) on their channels should also be proceeded against under section 126 (1) (b) by filing separate complaints/firs against those channles. Complaince reports in this regard should be sent to the Commission latest by 6:00PM today. Copies of complaints/firs should also be furnished to the Commission along with the complaince report. mijksdr i= fnukad vusdtj ih& ;gfd] iz/kkuea=h Jh ujsunz eksnh ds fo:) fnukad dks fuokzpu vk;ksx ds vkns k ij Økbe czkap vgenkckn flvh ds iqfyl balisdvj Jh gjiky flag,- jkbksm+ }kjk ntz dh xbz,q-vkbz-vkj- bl izdkj gs fd& N.C. Entry No DCB PS 1/2014 Dated H.A. Rathod, Police Inspector, Crime Ahemdabad City is submitting this complaint on behalf of the State. I have received a letter from Commissioner of Police, Ahmedabad City PA/CP/1459/14 dated Along with this letter, copy of the letter from Election Commission of India vide no. 464/GJ-HP/2014/WS-I dated and letter from Director General of Police, Gujrat dated vide no. G-I/SCR/LSE-2014/NM/2014/620 are attached as enclosure. In this connection, it is submitted that the above referred letter from Election Commission of India has stated as folloes: The Commission has seen the video recording of the address by Sh. Narendra Modi at a meeting in Ahemdabad after he cast his vote today( ) in the morning. From the substance, tone and tenor of the address made by Sh. Modi and the statements made by him and the manner in which the symbol Lotus of the BJP was being displayed by him, thereby displaying the public election matter by means of televisions in polling areas going to polls today it is evidently that the said address was in the nature of political speech intended and calculated to influence and affect the result of elections in the constituencies going to poll today, not only in Ahmedabad but also in all other constituencies in the State of Gujrat and eleswhere in the country.. The commission is of the view that by holding that meeting and also by addressing the same today when the polling is going on in the entire State of Gujrat and in different parts of the country, sh. Narendra Modi has violated the provisions of Section 126 (1) (a) and 126 (1) (b) of R.P. Act Therefore, the Commission directs under Article 324 of the Constitution and all other legal provisions enabling it in this behalf that complaints/fir as the case may be, should be filed against sh. Narendra Modi and all Others who were involved in the convening and holding of the said meeting under the provisions of Sections 126 (1) (a) and 126(1) (b). Further, if any restrictions have been imposed by the competent authority in Ahmadabad under section 144 of CrPC, then complaints/fir should also be made under Section 188 of IPC. The Commission further directs that all the TV channels and other electronic media which carried the proceedings/images of the said meeting and display of election matter (as defined in section 126(3) of R.P. Act, 1951) on their channels should also be proceeded against under section 126 (1) (b) by filing separate complaints/firs against those channles. Therefore, information of offence under section 126 (1) (b) of Representation of People Act, 1951 is declared before me for the fact that the poll in Gandhinagar Plarliament Constituency is on and the TV Channels and other electronic media, which carried the proceedings/images of the meeting in Ahmedabad by Shri Narendra Modi after he cast his vote today, and thereby displaying to the public election matter (as defined in Section 126 (3) of R.P. Act, 1951) on their channels, have committed an offence displaying to the public election matter by means of television and other similar apparatus. Further, as directed by above referred letter a separate complaint against Shri Narendra Modi and others is 31

32 submitted for offece under various sections of law for the act committed which is mentioned hereinabove. An offence shall be registered under section 126 (1) (b) of Representation of peoples Act, 1951 against all the TV Channels and other electronic media which carried the proceedings/ images of the said meeting and display of election matter(as defined in Selection 126 (3) of R.P. Act, 1951) on their channels. Before the (Harapal Singh A. Rathod) Police Inspector, Crime Branch, Ahmedabad City. mijksdr,q-vkbz-vkj- vusdtj ih& ;gfd] iz/kkuea=h Jh ujsunz eksnh ds fo:) fnukad dks fuokzpu vk;ksx ds vkns k ij Økbe czkap vgenkckn flvh ds iqfyl balisdvj Jh gjiky flag,- jkbksm+ }kjk ntz dh xbz,q-vkbz-vkj- ds laca/k esa bavjusv }kjk tkjh fd;s x;s QksVks,oa lekpkj tks bl izdkj gs fd& A first infromation report (FIR) was registered against the BJP s Prime ministerial candidate, Narendra Modi, on Election Commission order for allegedly violating electoral laws by displaying the party s lotus symbol after voting in Gandhinagar on Wednesday. Mr. Modi has been booked for violating Sections 126 (1) (a) and 126 (1) (b) of the Representation of the people Act, 1951 and under Section 188 (disobedience to order duly promulgated by public servant) of the Indian Penal Code. Deputy Commissioner of Police Himanshu Shukla told The Hindu Section 126 (1) (a) prohibits holding of a public meeting or address in connection with an election and 126 (1) (b) bans displaying any election and 126 (1) (b) bans displaying any election matter by means of cinematograph of television. Around 8.30a.m., Mr. Modi arrived at the Nishan secondary school polling booth in Gandhinagar. After he cast his vote, his car headed to a garden, separated from the polling stateon by a small lane. As he began talking to the media, he held a lotus badge in his hand, displaying it prominently before the media along with his inked finger. He also posed with the lotus symbols for a selfie. The Election Commission was of the view that this amounted to addressing a public meeting and displaying campaign material. It said Mr. Modi s address was intended to influence the result of elections in constituencies going to the polls on Wednesday. But Meenakshi Lekhi of the BJP insisted that Mr. Modi had not violated the election code. It was not an organised press conference. The police filed a case against channels that aired Mr. Modi s press conference. tks vusdtj ih& ;gfd] Hkkjr fuokzpu vk;ksx dh Qkby ua- 56/Misc./2011/Political Parties Section-II, SI No. 1 (R) dh vkwmzj khv & The PUC is from shri Sher Mohammad Shah Seeking freezing of symbol Hand allotted of Indian National Congress on the ground of its being the symbol of faith (popularly known as palm of AID of Muslim religion. In this context it is stated that as per proviso to the Section 123 (3) of the Representation of People Act, 1951, no symbol allotted to a candidate shall be deemed to he a religious symbol or a national symbol. Thus, the Commission does not have any ground to freeze the symbol Hand allotted to Indian National Congress and therefore, the puc may be filed. SI No. 2 (R) The PUC is from sh. Chandrashekhar Rishidev wherein he has requested to derecognise the Congress Party as it is not functioning according to the democratic system of the Country. On Perusal of the complaint, it appears that by the term Congress Party, the applicant means the Indian National Congress. However, in this context, it may be intimated that recognition and de recognition of any political party is entirely based on poli performance of the party and is also governed by para 16-A of the election Symbols (Reservation and Allotment) Order, SI No -3 (R) PUC is complained by sh. P. Naresh Reddy. He has made several complaints against the Indian National Congress but only two of them pertain to the ECI. In his complained Sh. Reddy has requested to freeze the symbol hand on the ground of its being a religious symbol (Abhay of many Hindu god and goddess). He has also requested to restrain the Indian National Congress and any other political pary from using the tricolour flag or any flag which has the color imitation of the National flag. In this context, it is stated that as per proviso to the Section 123 (3) of the Representation of Peoples Act, 1951, no symbol allotted to a candidated shall be deemed to be a religious symbol or a national symbol. Thus the commission does not have any ground to freeze the symbol Hand allotted to Indian National Congress. It is also stated that the Commission has no role in the matter of flag of any political party. However, as regard the flag of Indian National Congress, the applicant s attention may be invited to Order dated of the Hon ble Supreme Court in SLP (C) No. 6195/204 (B. Krishna Bhatt Vs, Union of India & ors.) SI. No. 4 (R) Please refer remarks of the LA (SKM) over the PUC This has been considered previously also. In view of this. it may be filed. SI. No. 5 (R) This is unsigned letter. Hence, this may be filed. Order dated , , , , tks vusdtj ih& ;gfd] Hkkjr fuokzpu vk;ksx o kz 2017 leiw.kz Hkkjr ds fofhkuu jkt;ksa ds ernkrkvksa ds fuokzpu lwph dk izdk ku fd;k x;ka ftlds vuqlkj dqy ernkrk gsaa tks vusdtj ih& ;gfd] Hkkjr fuokzpu vk;ksx dh vkwmzj khv fnukad SI. No (R) No. Name of the representationist Relif (s) sought for 1. Shri Dip Rikahrdi To remove Commission s emblem affixed on EVM 2. Shri Arvind Sharda To de-recognise INC and NCP and to stop these parties for Grounds (s) It resembles with the Flag of INC. Their flag resembles with the National Flag of India. 32

33 using tri-colour flag. 3. Shri Mayank Dwivedi (i) To stop the use of Flag resembling with the National Flag by the Political parties. (ii) To ban symbols depicting the animals and birds. 33 It resembles with the National Flag. Cruelty against animals. 4. Shri Sanjay Nagyan To change the flag of the political parties resembling with National Flag 5. Shri Topsingh Boudh. To change the flag of INC. It resembles with the National Flag. 6. Shri Anil Kumar Gupta. (i) To change the flag of INC. (ii) To freeze the symbol of BSP, INC and BJP (iii) Some reforms in electroal process have also been Proposed. It resembles with the National Flag. These are religious symbol. Transferred to SDR Section. 6A. Rakesh nath Pandey As above As above 7. Shri vinod Kumar Garg. To stop INC and NCP for using tri-colour flag. It gives undue advantage to such parties of being National Pride. 8. Shri Suresh Bahadur (i) To freeze the symbol Hand Ram allotted to the INC. (ii) To stop INC for using tricolour. 9. Shri Anil Kumar Yadav To put up curtain on all the bicycles, Lotus folwer and Hand being the symbols of Samajwadi Party BJP and INC respectively. 10. Dr. Harishankar Lal Objected to the symbol Hand Vidhyarthi. of INC. 11. Shri Kailash Singh Poya To freeze the symbol Hand of INC 12. Smt. Bharti Shastri To freeze the symbol Hand of INC 13. Shri Nagesh Roa. To freeze the symbol Hand of INC 14. Shri Chirulal Kumhar To freeze the symbol Hand of INC 15. Shri Mukesh Chouhan To freeze the symbol Hand spectacles etc. 16. Shekh Nizzamudin To freeze the symbols of big parties like BSP, BJP, INC and Samajwadi parties and allot some other symbols. 17. Shri Rajat Jain Suggested to freeze all the symbols and allot different symbol in different constitucncies to the political parties. 19. Anonymous 20. Dr. Jyotindra Nirmal Disallow the Congress (i) Party to use the Name of Indian Being a part of human body during election it violates model code of conduct. It resembles with National Flag. In order to make free and fair election. The English meaning of Punja, the symbol of IN is Palm whereas it is mentioned as Hand. Being a part of human body during election it violates model code of conduct. Being a part of human body during election it violates model code of conduct. Being a part of human body during election it violates model code of conduct. Being a part of human body during election it violates model code of conduct. These symbols violtes the MCC and the criteria not to use any symbol within 100 mtrs. Radius of polling Booths. No specific ground has been given. To give equal opportunity to the new comers. Original Indian National Congress had been wound up

34 National Congress. and got split in Shri R.L. Kain To deregister the Indian National Congress. 34 Not supplying certain documents sought by him. In the past, we had received several complaints of similar nature and replied to the complainants accordingly. Therefore, the action proposed on the above complints, are as under:- SI No. 1 to the above table:- As no emblem or mark affixed on the EVM, the complaints appears to be misplaced. This may be filed. SI. No. 2:- Applicant may be informed that recognition and dercognitin of political parties entirely depends upon the poll performance of political partices and para 16A of the Symbol Order, Further, the Commission has no role in the matter of flag of any political party. As regards flag of INC, his attention may be invited to the Order dated of Hon ble Supreme Court in SLP No. 6195/2004 (B. Krishna Bhatt Vs. UOI & Ors). Therefore, his request cannot be maintainable under the grounds mentioned in his petition. SI. No. 3 to 8 including 6A of the above table:- The complainants may be informed that the commission has no role in the matter of flag of any political party and as regards the flag of INC. This attention may be invited to the Order dated of Hon ble Supreme Court in SLP No. 6195/2004 (B. Krishna Bhatt Vs. UOI & Ors). In additiion to above, the complainante No. (3) may be intimated that the Commission has already taken a decision not to allot any symbol depicting animal and bird in future. So far as existing symbols reserved by political parties, it has been directed to all these party to ensure no cruelty should be meted out to these animals being reserved as the election symbol. The complainant mentioned at SI. No, (6) may be intimated that as per proviso to the Section 123 (3) of the R.P. Act, 1951, no symbol allotted to a candidate shall be deemed to be a religious symbol or a national symbol. The complaint No. (8) may also be informed about the fact mentioned at SI. No. (11-15) below. SI. No. 9 and to:- No action appears necessary on these complaints as no specific reason has been mentioned for the relief claimed therein. SI. No. 11 to 15:- The complainants (except 13, as no address has been given) may be informed that the symbol Hand has been the reserved symbol of the Indian National Congress for almost three decades. It was on ealier symbol even before it was allotted to INC. Just because Hand is a part of the human body it is not sufficient enough reason to object to it as an election symbol. There are several other election symbols which represent articles of daily use found in or around the polling stations, such as ceiling fan, table, chair, stool, clock, inkpot & pen, cup & saucer and key etc. If any symbol is misused inside the polling station for soliciting votes, ther are provisions to deal with such offences. S.NO. 16 to 19 to the above tables:- These may be filed as no specific reason for convincting reason have been given. SI. No. 20:- The name Indian National Congress has been given to the party on the basis of an Order passed by the Commission in this matter. Therefore, no action appears necessary. May be filed. SI. No. 21:- Application of the complainant may be informed that in view of the judgment dated of the Hon ble Supreme Court in civil appeal Nos /2001 (Indian National Congress(1) Vs. Institute for social Welfare and others) [( SCC 685) the Commission has no power to cancel the registration of any political party except the three exceptions mentioned therein. Order dated , , , mijksdr vkns k if=dk vusdtj ih& ;gfd] Hkkjr fuokzpu vk;ksx }kjk izkir vkosnuksa ij dh xbz dk;zokgh ds laca/k esa fnukad dks fy[kh xbz vkwmzj khv SI. No (R) No. Name of the Relif (s) sought for Grounds (s) representationist 1. Shri Bherulal (i) To change the flag of the polititcal parties resembling with National Flag. (ii) To freeze the symbol Hand of the Indian National Congress. 2. Gaurhari Mahapatra To freeze the symbol Hand of the Indian National Congress. It resembles with the National Flag. It resembles with religious symbol of various political parties. Being a part of the human body during election it violates model code. mijksdr vkwmzj khv fnukad ] ] ] ] vusdtj ih& ;gfd] Hkkjr fuokzpu vk;ksx dh vkns k if=dk fnukad ] ] SI. No , (R) :- The PUC has been received from an anonymous person in which he has requested to put a ban on the tricolour flag of the political parties like Indian National Congress, Nationalist Congress Party, etc. as it resembles with the National Flag. In this case, it may be stated that as regards th flag of Indian National Congress, their attention may be invited to the Order dated of Hon ble Supreme Court is SLP No. 6195/2004 (B. Krishna Bhatt Vs. UOI & Ors.) Further, as the petitioner has not is name/address, the PUC may be filed. SI. No. 62 (R):- The PUC has been received from Shri Janardan Dwivedi, General Secrctary, Indian National Congress in which he has submitted the updated lists of Presidents of State unis of Indian national Congress. This is for information. mijksdr vkwmzj khv fnukad ] ] rd vusdtj ih&121

35 ;gfd] S. No (R) vkosnuksa dh vkns k if=dk %& There are receipts/petitions of variour people regularly freezing of election symbol Hand of Indian National Congress 76 seventy six receipts have already been dealt at SI. No (R) and reply has been sent to the main petitioner. Ram Niranjan Gaur of Samata Andloan action has alreay been taken No. action appeals necessarly. mijksdr vkwmzj khv fnukad ls vusdtj ih&122 ;gfd] S. No (R) vkosnuksa dh vkns k if=dk %& There are receipts/petitions of variour people regularly freezing of election symbol Hand of Indian National Congress 96 ninety six such receipts have already been dealt with (P-31-03&35/N) and reply has been sent to the main petitioner.ram Niranjan Gaur of Samata Andloan action has alreay been No. actionp-35/n appeals necessarly at decided at P-35/N. mijksdr vkwmzj khv fnukad ls vusdtj ih& ;gfd] Hkkjr fuokzpu vk;ksx }kjk vkns k if=dk fnukad ] ] ] S. No. 67 (R)- The PUC is a representation received from Shri Jitendra Nagi, Advocate regarding the misuse of Hand symbol of Indian National Congress related t o 183-Maheshwar (SC) legislative assembly constituency bye-election in the state of Madhya Pradesh, which has been sent by the Returning Officer of the said constituency. Shri Jitendra Nagi has alleged that the symbol Hand is misused inside the polling booth and so it should be banned inside the polling booth. Full enclosed letter has not been found enclosed. The partial address of Jan Chetna Manch, Maheshwar is given. In this context, it ay be stated that the symbol Hand has been the reserved symbol of the Indian National Congress for almost three decades. It was an election symbol even before it was allotted to Indian National Congress. Just because Hand is a part of the human body, it is not sufficient enough to object to it as being used inside the polling station. There are several other election symbols which represent articles of daily use found in or around the polling stations, such as ceiling fan, table, chair, stool, clock, inkpot & pen, cupo & sauccer and key etc. If any symbol is misused inside the polloing station for soliciting votes, there are provisions to deal with such offences. But there has been no supporting evidance from the petitioner in this regard. In view of the above, the applicant may be informed as per the DFA. A copy of the reply, may also be sent to West Section-I and Returning Officer, 183- Maheshwar (SC) Assembly Constituency, Madhya Pradesh for intimating to Shri Jitendra Negi. mijksdr vkns k if=dk vusdtj ih& ;gfd] Hkkjr fuokzpu vk;ksx }kjk vkns k if=dk fnukad ] ] ] ] S. No (R)- No. Name of the Relif (s) sought for Grounds (s) representationist 1. Dr. Tirath Garg To change the flag of Indian It resembls with the National National Congress resembling Flag. with National Flag and to derecognize it as a political party. mijksdr vkns k if=dk vusdtj ih& ;gfd] Hkkjr fuokzpu vk;ksx }kjk vkns k if=dk fnukad ] ] ] S. No (R)- No. Name of the Relif (s) sought for Grounds (s) representationist 1. Shri Roshan Lal Kapoor To change the flag of Indian National Congress resembling with National Flag. 2. Shri Ram Niranjan Gaur and various others To freeze the symbol Hand of the Indian National Congress. 35 It resembls with the National Flag. By allowing caste based reservation it is violating the provisions of the Indian Constitution. mijksdr vkns k if=dk vusdtj ih& ;gfd] Hkkjr fuokzpu vk;ksx }kjk vkns k if=dk fnukad ] S. No. 114 (R)- Shri K.C. Mittal, Secretary, Legal and Human Rights Departmenr. Indian National Congress has requested for the order dated by which Hand symbol was reserved for the Indian National Congress. The concerned file is File No. 56/6/81 (Subject:- Indian National Congress-recognition Commission s Order dated on disputes between INC(1) and INC (U). On persual of the records available in the Commission. It has been found that the concerned file is lying in the National Archives. Library and information Officer is requested to provide us the above mentione file. The requisition for the above mentioned file is placed below at F/X. It is a matter of utmost importance as ordered by the Chief Election Commissioner. mijksdr vkns k if=dk vusdtj ih& ;gfd] Hkkjr fuokzpu vk;ksx }kjk vkns k if=dk fnukad ] ] ] S. No. 116 (R)- No. Name of the Relif (s) sought for Grounds (s)

36 representationist 1. Ravi Sharma To intiate action against the Indian National Congress for showing disrespect to the National Flag and for misusing the National Flag, to derecognize it as a political party and to cancle the registration of the aforesaid Party. mijksdr vkns k if=dk vusdtj ih& It resembls with the National Flag ;gfd] Hkkjr fuokzpu vk;ksx }kjk vkns k if=dk fnukad ] ] S. No. 121 (R)- bafm;u us kuy dkaxzsl ds gkfk o ikvhz /ot ds laca/k esa myys[k fd;k gsaa tks vusdtj ih& ;gfd] Hkkjr fuokzpu vk;ksx }kjk vkns k if=dk fnukad ] S. No (R)- The PUCs are petition by Shri Buddhadeb Ghanti in which he has requested to freeze the election symbol Hand of Indian National Congress on the following grounds:- (i) Being a part of the human body, it can be misused inside the polling stations and hence, it violates the Model Code of Conduct. (ii) Hand is a panic symbol in child psychology, expressing cruclty. It will disturb the small school going students. (iii) No other body parts have been permitted by the Commission as election symbols. (iv) Using Hand symbol is against the values of Indian democracy and violates human rights. tks vusdtj ih& ;gfd] Hkkjr fuokzpu vk;ksx dks fnukad dks Bhddhadeb Ghan dks fn;k x;k vkosnu &Here I appeal for cancel hand symbol of Indian National Congress Party as because:- (A) By original this symbolic represantion aotomatically can reach with the voter upto ballot paper while other symbol did not get same opporunity. This is against the theory-lwa equal for all- (ernku d{k ls nwjh% gj % izrhd dqn Hkhrj gkfk D;ksa er isij ds Åij½A (B) Cutting parts of human body here is hand panic symnol for child psychology. It is silently growup there cruelty especially it is mosy hasful when this symbol appear infront of a nurse school or here and there. (C) If you continue permit this symbol of human body then in future you have to permit other parts also. (D) You noble administration is a part of India democracy system not a medical science there now can you grant to use parts of human bodies sketch as a polotical parties symbol. (E) Her you received any permission from I.tks vkosnu vusdtj ih& ;gfd] Hkkjr fuokzpu vk;ksx }kjk vkns k if=dk fnukad ] ] ] ] S. No. 129(R)- The PUC is a petition from Shri Naveen YS in which the petitioner has stated that the symbol Hand of Indian National Congress can be misutilised inside the polling stations in the incoming Karnataka elections. tks vusdtj ih& ;gfd] Hkkjr fuokzpu vk;ksx }kjk vkns k if=dk fnukad ] ] ] ] ] S. No (R)- No. Name of the Relif (s) sought for Grounds (s) representationist 1. (i) Dr. Ram Jawale (ii) S. Keshav P (iii) Manobhav Tripathi (iv) Dr. Tirath Garg (v) Nutan Thakur To change the flag of the political parties resembling with National Flag. It resembles with the national Flag. 2. (i) Girish Sharma (ii) Manisha Sharma (iii) Kailash Chandra (i) To change the flag of the political parties resembling with National Flag. (ii) To freeze the symbol Hand of the Indian Nationl Congress. 3. Shri Ramniranjan Gaur To freeze the symbol Hand of the Indian National Congress. 4. Dr. Ravindra Kumar To Cancel the registration of political parties having criminal leaders and removal of Dr. Manmohan Singh from Prime Ministership. It resembles with the National Flag. By being a part of the human body it violates the model code of conduct. By including caste based reservation in the promotion it is acting against the constitution of the country. Criminal leaders are acting against the constitution. In the past, we had received several complaints of similar nature and replied to the complainants accordingly. Therefore, the acting proposed on the above complaints, are as under. The complainants may be informed that as regards the flag of Indian National Congress, their a ttention may be invited to the Order dated of Hon ble Supreme Court in SLP No. 6195/2004 (B. Krishna Bhatt Vs. UOI & Ors.). In addition to above, the complainant No. (2)may also intimated that the symbol Hand has been the reserved symbol of the Indian National Congress for almost three decades. tks vusdtj ih&133

37 131- ;gfd] Hkkjr fuokzpu vk;ksx }kjk vkns k if=dk fnukad ] ] S. No. 153(R)- The PUC has been received from Shri Shiv Shankar Tiwari and others in which they have requested to put a ban on the tricolour flag of the political parties like Indian national Congress, Nationalist Congress party. etc. as it resemble with the national Flag. In this case, it may be stated that as regards the flag of Indian national Congress, their attention may be invited to the Order dated of Hon ble Supreme Court in SLP 6195/2004 (B. Krishna Bhatt Vs. UOI & Ors.). Accordingly, a draft letter is put up for approval.. tks vusdtj ih& ;gfd] Hkkjr fuokzpu vk;ksx }kjk fnukad dks fn;s x;s vkosnu dk tckc&freezing of the Symbol Hand of Indian National Congress regarding. Your letter dated on the subject cited above in the context. It is informed that the symbol Hand has been the reserved symbol of the Indian National Congress for more than three decades. It was an election symbol even before it was allotted to the Indian National Congress. Just because Hand is a part of the human body, it is not sufficient enough reason to object to it as an election symbol. There are several other election symbols which represent articles of daily use found in or around the polling station, such as the ceiling fan, table, chair, stool, clock, inkpot & pen, cupo & sauccer and key etc. If any symbol is misused inside the polloing station for soliciting votes, there are provisions to deal with such offences. In view of the above, your request for freezing of symbol Hand allotted to Indian National Congress cannot be granted. tks vusdtj ih& ;gfd] iadt kekz }kjk Hkkjr fuokzpu vk;ksx dks fn;k x;k vkosnu fnukad dks dgk x;k fd& 15 vxlr 1947 dks jk Vª dks lefizr jk Vªh; /ot ds dylz o fmtkbu ij dkaxzsl vkbz ds pquko fpug gkfk ij eq>s vkifrr gs] esa bls psysut djrk gw A dkaxzsl vkbz ds pquko fpug }kjk gkfk dk jk Vªh; /ot ds dyj o fmtkbu ij blrseky djus ij jksd yxkbz tk;s o dkaxzsl lafgrk dk myya?ku D;ksafd ;s& 1- vkn kz vkpkj lafgrk dk myya?ku 2- jk Vªh; /ot dh voekuuk 3- jk Vªh; /ot ls NsM+NkM+ 4- jk Vªh; /ot dk vieku 5- jk Vªh; /ot ds leeku dks Bsl igqaprh tks vusdtj ih& ;gfd] Hkkjr fuokzpu vk;ksx }kjk fnukad dks iadt kekz dks fn;s x;s vkosnu dk tckc&ban on use of Indian National Congress Flag and derecognition of the party Regarding. Your letter dated on the subject cited above and to state that as per proviso to the Section 123(3) of the Representation of People Act, 1951 no symbol allotted to a candidate shall be deemed to be a religious symbol or a national symbol. As regards the flag of Indian National Congress, your attention is invited to the Order dated of the Hon ble Supreme Court in SLP No. 6195/2004 (B. Krishan Bhatt Vs. UOI and Ors.) It is also informed that the recognition and derecognition of political parties depend upon the poll performance of political parties and para 16A of the Election Symbol (Reservation & Allotment) Order, In view of the above rhe reliefs claimed in your letter on the grounds mentioned therein cannot be granted. tks vusdtj ih& ;gfd] Shri Sivaraman Sridharan Tiruuchi ls fnukad dks bz&esy }kjk Hkkjr fuokzpu vk;ksx lfgr vu; txg Hksts x;s vkosnu The voters are normally decided to vote for a particular party/candidate before coming to the booth. Hence, the demand for covering the BSP Elephant symbol or BJP lotus symbol is not parctically possible and also no purpose served. In fact, Congress party is having Hand as its symbol and how can it be covered for the entire people where the election tkaes places? or whether Congress party will agree to that. Election commission shall explore the possibility to send a notice to the Congress party to change its symbol before 2014 elections. tks vusdtj ih& ;gfd] Deputy Chief Electroal Officer & Deputy Secretary to Government Chennai-9 }kjk Hkkjr fuokzpu vk;ksx dks fnukad dks fn;k x;ka ftlesa fy[kk x;k fd &I am directed to enclose a copy of the e- mail received from Thiru. Sivaraman Sridharan, Srirangam, Tiruchirappallim, wherein he has levelled allegations against the political party viz. Indian National Congress & its symbol and requested to send a notice to the above party, for necessary action. tks vusdtj ih& ;gfd] jktk jke esgj eamhnhi jk;lsu e-iz- }kjk fnukad fot; n keh ioz dks eq[; pquko vk;qdr] ekuuh; eq[; U;k;kf/kifr mppre U;k;ky; fnyyh] ekuuh; eq[; U;k;kf/kifr mpp U;k;ky; fnyyh] t;iqj] jk;iqj] tcyiqj] vgenkckn] fetksje dks Hksts x;s vkosnu ftlesa jktusfrd ikvhz;ksa dks fn;s x;s pquko fpug,oa vkpkj lafgrk dk [kqys vke myya?kua mijksdr fo k; esa vkidk /;ku vkdf kzer dj jgs gs fd Hkkjr dh pquko vk;ksx lalfkk ftldk,deso drzo;,oa nkf;ro ns k esa vkn kz pquko lafgrk dk ikyu djrs gq;s fu i{k pquko djkuk jgk fdl rjg vksj fdl fy;s viuk nkf;ro fuokzg esa iw.kz :is.kq lqy ugha gks ik jgh ¼1½ lu~ 1951 ls tc ls ns k ds pqukoh izfø;k kq: gqbz rc ls vkt rd Hkkjrh; jk Vªh; dkaxzsl dks pquko vk;ksx bl rjg ds pquko fpug iznku djrk vk;k gs tks Hkkjrh; lald`fr ls tqm+s jgs gs vksj cgqla[;d leqnk; dh Hkkoukvksa ds izrhd 1951 esa ^^gy ds lkfk nks csyks dh tksm+h**%& iw.kzr% ml dkr ds 78 izfr kr xkoksa esa clus okys xzkeh.kks dh thouh Fkh thou nkf;uh Fkh] cgqla[;d lekt ds egknso Jh kadj dh lokjh ^^uunh** ds :i esa nks csyksa dh tksm+h Fks tks cgqla[;d lekt ds vklfkk ds f k[kj fcanq gs le> ugha vk;k D;ksa vksj dsls pquko vk;ksx us ;g ^^fpug** dkaxzsl dks iznku dj fn;k ftlls cgqla[;d lekt dh vklfkk tqm+h gksaa vksj bl rjg 1951 ls 1967 rd dkaxzsl lrrk esa dkfct jg dj cgq la[;d lekt dh Hkkoukvksa ls f[kyokm+ djrh jgh vksj mls misf{kr Hkh djrh jgh ^^pqauko vk;ksx fdl rjg bl nks kiw.kz dk;z dks os eku vkpkj &lafgrk dk Lo;a gh myya?ku djrk jgk\ vksj lgh Bgjkrk jgk\ ¼2½ 1967@1971 esa dkaxzsl fohkktu ds ckn fqj pquko vk;ksx us ns k dh cgqla[;d tula[;k 37

38 dh vklfkk dh izrhd ^^xks,oa mldh tfu= cnm+k** vfkok ^^xks&cnm+k** pquko fpug iwt;rk ds izrhd iznku fd;k ;gka fqj pquko vk;ksx dh lksp bl pquko fpug ds izfr oslh gh cuh jgh tcfd ;g Hk;adj vkifrrtud pquko fpug Fkk tks fdlh Hkh dks.k ls vkn kz pquko vkpkj lafgrk ds avarxzr ugha vkrk\ xks,oa xks tfu= cgq la[;d leqnk; ^^ekrk** rqy; ekurk ftls udkjk ugha tk ldrk\ ¼3½ blds ckn pquko vk;ksx ;gha ugha :dk mlus ^^iatk gkfk** dk iatk pquko fpug irk ugha D;ksa vksj dsls vkcafvr dj fn;k gs ;g rks Hkwy dh ijkdk Bk gs vksj?kksjre vkpkj lafgrk dk myya?ku ¼4½ vkf[kj D;ksa vksj fdl rjg oksv nsrs le; ernkrk ^^gkfk** dks Hkwy ldrk gs tcfd izr;sd ds ^^gkfk ds iats** dh maxyh ij ^^L;kgh** yxkbz tkrh gs vksj gkfk ls ^^BIik** ;k bz&oh-,e- e khu dk ^cvu* nck;k tkrk gs le>nkj ds fy;s bruk b kkjk gh dkqh gs fd ftu gkfkksa ls vki dez djrs] [kkuk [kkrs gs thou dh fnup;kz esa ftldk xgure mi;ksx gksrk gs nsoh nsork gh ugha cqtqxksz] xq:vksa,oa vu;ksa dk vk khzokn bl gkfk ds ^^iats** fpug ls izdv fd;k tkrk ftls tkucw>dj ^^pquko vk;ksx** us dkaxzsl dks lrrk esa cuk;sa j[kus ds fy;s iznku fd;k vksj ns k ds izr;sd ernkrk dks ckj&ckj ;g lkspus ds fy;s etcwj fd;k fd og vius gh gkfk ds ^^iats** dks oksv D;ksa ugha nsa\ ¼5½ D;k pquko vk;ksx ;g fl) djuk pkgrk gs fd og vu; jktusfrd ikfvz;ksa dks ^^nhid** ^^dey** gfl;k&gfkksm+k ^^cjxn dk ism+** gkfk vkfn tks Hkh pquko fpug iznku dj jgk gs og cgqla[; leqnk; ls vklfkk ds fpug gh ugha iwt; bugsa fofhkuu ikfvz;ksa dks iznku dj og fdl rjg bl ifj.kke ij igqaprk gs fd blls lekt ds ernkrkvksa dh Hkkoukvksa ls f[kyokm+ ugha gs bl pquko fpugksa ds iznku dj og ernkrk dh vklfkkvksa dks izhkkfor ugha dj jgk gs\ pquko vk;ksx dguk pkgsxk fd vkt rd fdlh Hkh jktusfrd ny us pquko fpugksa ds ckjs eas fdlh Hkh izdkj dk fojks/k nk;j ugha fd;k\ og D;ksa djsxs tc mudksa,sls pquko fpugksa ls ykhk fey jgk gs lrrk fey jgh gs\ ;g rks pquko vk;ksx dk Loeso nkf;ro,oa d`frro gksuk pkfg;s fd og fdlh Hkh leiznk; dh Hkkoukvksa dk ykhk ;k f[kyokm+ fdlh Hkh jktusfrd ny dks ugha feyus ns vksj rvlfk j[kdj vkpkj lafgrk dk myya?ku u gksus nsa D;k pquko vk;ksx 200 ehvj ds nk;js esa ikd&lkq okrkoj.k dk /kks[kk nsdj ikfvz;ksa dks /kkfezd] vkflfkd,oa cgqla[;d leqnk; ds ^^iwt;** fpug iznku dj tks bz-oh-,e- e khu,oa ^^oksv** ij tks vafdr jgrs gs izhkkfor ugha dj jgk gs\ tcfd ^^gkfk dk iatk** rks ernkrk Lo;a iz;ksx djrk gsa rfkk ;g mldh ekufldrk dk Hkh iz;ksx djrk gs tcfd fdlh ny dk pquko fpug 200 ehvj ds nk;js rd esa ugha gh gksuk pkfg;s tc fd ^^gkfk dk iatk** rks er i=,oa er isvh&bz-oh-,e-,oa e khu,oa ernkrk dk Lo;a rd vkafdr gksrk gs ;g?kksjre myya?ku gs bls rqjar fujlr fd;k tk;sa blds LFkku ij ^^u;k pquko** fpug iznku fd;k tk ldrk gs rkfd fo/kku lhkk o yksd lhkk ds pquko lafgrk varxzr leiuu djk;sa tk;sa\ ;g turk ds lkfk ljklj /kks[kk gs\ mijksdr i= vusdtj ih& ;gfd] Lora=rk lsukuh Jh ek/kojko Hkxokujko dqyd.khz /kke.kxk o egkjk Vª }kjk Hkkjr fuokzpu vk;ksx dks fn;s x;s vius i= esa fy[kk tks fnukad dks fn;k x;ka ftlesa mugksus viuh mez 84 o kz crkbz gs ftlesa mugksus gkfk ds iats fuokzpu fpug dks ysdj vkifrr dh mijksdr i= vusdtj ih&141 jkt; fuokzpu vk;ksx egkjk Vª }kjk tks ejkbh esa fy[kk ftlesa Election symbols Hand dks fujlr djus ds laca/k esa Hkkjr fuokzpu vk;ksx dks fy[kk x;k tks vusdtj ih& ;gfd] fo oukfk vkj- vxzoky ukxiqj }kjk Hkkjr fuokzpu vk;ksx dks fnukad dks fn;s x;s vius vkosnu esa fy[kk fd & Complainant against the allotment of Palm Election symbol to Indian national congress. I beg to draw your kind attention & raise conplain against the allotted palm election symbol to Indian National Congress for the following reason. That, a voter, election officials enter the polling booth at the time of election with their plam and violating the code of conduct of election rule in my knowledge. That it is a fact that the plam is the part and parcel of the human body. Everybody coming in side the polling booth with their plam at the time of polling. That in my knowledge this violet the code of conduct of the election rule. Same rule are adopted for all party & all elections symbol. That in my knowledge to carry the election symbol inside the polling booth centre is violating the existing election rule. Therefore, I request you to verify my complaint and clarify in to the matter, which I raised in my petition as above. tks vusdtj j ih& ;gfd] PORKALAM S.M. RAJA psuubz ls,d lkekftd lalfkk }kjk gkfk ds iats dks fujlr djus ds laca/k esa Hkkjr fuokzpu vk;ksx] jkt; fuokzpu vk;ksx rfeyukm+q psuubz dks vkosnu fnukad dks fn;k fd & Hand to a part of the voter s body and so it should not be used as a Symbol of Congress party in the election. This Hand Symbol should be BANNRD within 15 days and it should be informed to us. If you fall to do so banning the Hand Symbol in the election and fall to avoid any part in the human body, as an election symbol for any political party. We will proceed to the court of law. We will also include the Election Commission in our case as a lawbreaker. As we are recognised voters in the Election of our Country. We plan to proceed to the court of Law with general interest of the country. Please understand our real grievance and we inform you that we procced to the court of law on the above subject. tks vusdtj ih&144 (A, B, C, D, E, F, G,) lekpkj i=ksa dh izfr vusdtj ih&145 (H, I, J, K, L, M, N) 141- ;gfd],d lkekftd lalfkk tks gsnjkckn dh gs }kjk fnukad dks Hkkjr fuokzpu vk;ksx,oa jkt; fuokzpu vk;ksx vka/kzizns k gsnjkckn dks fn;s x;s vkosnu esa fy[kk x;k fd& I state that as per the Handbook for Candidates available on official website of the Election Commission of India, in Chapter VII Campaign Period, in 6(B) regarding operation of Temporary Campaign Office, it is stated in point (d) that No such offices will be opened within 200 meters of an existing polling station and in point 19 with heading Symbol, it is stated that For the convenience of the voters, you may print copies of your symbol and 38

39 distribute them, but the voters cannot carry with them the paper containing the symbol to the polling station. These rules are for Fair Conduct of Elections. tks vusdtj ih&146] ;gfd] Hkkjr fuokzpu vk;ksx dks fn;s x;s vkosnu ds laaca/k esa vkns k if=dk ds vuqlkj & No. Name of the representationist Relif (s) sought for Grounds (s) 1. (i) Sivaram Sriddaran To freeze the symbol (i) It is difficult to cover all Hands (ii) Raja Ram Mehar Hand of Indian during election when Model Code of (iii) Madhavrao Kulkarni (iv) R. Mutharasan (v) Porkalam S.M. Raja (vi) Jitendra Bharti (vii) Rajesh Kumar Baj (viii) Syed W. llyder (iv) Vedprakash Bhartiya (x) P.K. Bhargav (xi) Harishankar (xii) S.R. Jangre (xiii) Biswanath Agrawal (xiv) Syed Inayat Ali (xv) Indravadan Patel (xvi) Manish R. Trivedi (xvii)k.k. Choudhary and Sh. Ashwani Kumar (xviii) Ganesh Jha (xix) Girish Shama (xx) Arvind Mishra (xxi) Yunus National Congress. Conduct is in force. (ii) Being a part of the human body, it violates the Model Code of Conduct as it is used inside polling booths. (iii) The election symbol allotted to INC is Hand and the Palm. (iv) Hand is considered a religious symbol by various communities. 2. (i) T.S. Chaithanya (ii) Hemant Patil (iii) Yeshwant Thakare (iv) Anandji Joshi To freeze the symbol Hand of Indian National Congress. 3. Shankar Gouda GH To take action against Indian National Congress. 4. Uday Dhakate To remove the symbol Charkha in the flag of INC. 39 It resembles the logo of Maharashtra Police and violates the Model Code of Conduct. The party is sending which are having cotent filled wiyh hatred. Charkha is a symbol of Halba tribe SI. No. 1:- The complainants may be informed that as regards the flag of Indian National Congress, their attention may be invited to the Order dated of Hon ble Supreme Court is SLP No. 6195/2004 (B. Krishna Bhatt Vs. UOI & Ors.) SI. No. 2:- In addition to (1) above, the complainants No. (2) may also be intimated that the symbol Hand has been the reserved symbol of the Indian National Congress for three and a half decades. tks vusdtj ih& ;gfd] osnizdk k Hkkjrh; gfj;k.kk 08&fHkokuh egsunzx< yksdlhkk {ks= }kjk fuokzpu fpug dks ysdj dh xbz f kdk;r fnukad }kjk fjvfuzax vf/kdkjh] ek- eq[; pquko vk;qdr] ek- eq[; U;k;k/kh k gkbzdksvz pamhx<+] ek- eq[; U;k;k/kh k lqizhe dksvz] egkefge jk Vªifr dks ys[kh; vkosnu esa dgk x;k fd & ^^fuokzpu {ks= esa vkn kz pquko lafgrk dk ikyu djus gq;s fofhkuu pquko fpugksa dks ernku dsunz ls 100 ehvj dh nwjh ij j[kus] esus pquko thrus dh iwjh lahkkouk gs ysfdu eq>s vkns k ugha gs fd ernku izfø;k ds nksjku ernku dsunzksa esa izr;kf k;ksa ds pquko fpug ekstwn gksus dk [krjk gsaa ftlesa ewy:i ls dkaxzsl dk ^^gkfk** ds laca/k es fn;k x;ka tks vusdtj ih& ;gfd] fnukad dks vtesj ls ih-ds- HkkxZo }kjk Hkkjr fuokzpu vk;ksx dks fn;s x;s vius vkosnu esa fy[kk fd& ^^vf[ky Hkkjrh; dkaxzsl ikvhz dks vf[ky Hkkjrg; Lrj ij ^^iatk** dk pquko fpug vkcafvr dj j[kk gs tks fd,d ekuo vax ;g gs fd vkids funsz kkuqlkj ernku ds nksjku ernku dsunz ds vanj vfkok ernku d{k ds vanj fdlh Hkh jktusfrd ny dk O;fDr vfkok izfrfuf/k vius lkfk pquko fpug ugha ys tk ldrk gs rfkk,slk djuk oftzr ;g gs fd vf[ky Hkkjrh; dkaxzsl ikvhz ds izfrfuf/k pquko ds le; ^ernku d{k* esa viuh ikvhz dk pquko fpug ^iatk* vius lkfk ysdj ernku d{k esa csbrs gs vksj ernkrk dks vius gfksyh ¼iatk½ fn[kkdj b kkjs ls ^^iats** ij ernku gsrq nckc Mkyrs gs] bl izdkj ;g fu i{k pquko dh Hkkouk ds foijhr gs rfkk pquko dks izhkkfor djrk ;g gs fd mdr rf; ij xahkhjrkiwozd fopkj djrs gq;s vf[ky Hkkjrh; dkaxzsl ikvhz dk orzeku pquko fpug ^^iatk** rqjar izhkko ls cnyk tk; vksj muds }kjk ekaxk x;k nwljk pquko fpug fu;ekuqlkj vkacfvr fd;k tk;sa tks vusdtj ih& ;gfd] fnukad dks t;iqj ls gjh kadj }kjk Hkkjr fuokzpu vk;ksx dks fn;s x;s vius vkosnu esa fy[kk fd& ¼1½ ekuo kjhj ds vfhkuu vax ^^gkfk** dks fuokzpu izrhd ds :i esa fu;r fd;k tkuk fof/kfo:) gksus ds

40 dkj.k vfof/keku; gs vksj ¼2½ thfor kjhjkax vfkkzr ^^gkfk** dks fuokzpu izrhd ds :i esa fu;r fd;k tkuk fof/k fo:) gksus ds dkj.k vfof/keku; gs vksj ¼3½ mdr fuokzpu izrhd ^^gkfk** vu;k; /kkfezd dkj.kksa ls Hkh fuokzpu izrhd ds :i esa vkjf{kr fd;k tkuk vfof/keku; gs vksj ¼4½ fuokzpu izrhd dks izpkfjr djuk vfkok iksfyax cwfk ds vanj ys tkuk izfrcaf/kr gs ijarq mdr vkjf{kr fuokzpu izrhd ^^gkfk** dks u dsoy izr;kf k;ksa ds dsei esa gh izpkfjr fd;k tkrk gs cfyd HkkSfrd :i ls Hkh ^^gkfk** dks iksfyax cwfk ds vanj Hkh iznf kzr fd;k tkrk gs vksj ¼5½ fuokzpu izrhd ^^gkfkh** dks foxr pqukoksa esa fuokzpu vk;ksx }kjk ikwfyffku@vkjiksfyu ls <dok;k x;k Fkk ijarq fuokzpu izrhd ^^gkfk** dks [kqysvke izpkfjr djus vksj iksfyax cwfk ds vanj rd Hkh izpkfjr djus dh NwV fn;k tkuk vfof/keku; tks vusdtj ih& ;gfd] fnukad dks NRrhlx<+ ls,l-vkj- tkaxm+s }kjk Hkkjr fuokzpu vk;ksx dks fn;s x;s vius vkosnu esa fy[kk fd&vkosnu ds in Øekad 2 eas kjhj ds vaxks dk ;Fkk gkfk] flj] eflr d] ukd] dku] isj dk pquko fpug cukuk ;k forfjr djuk vkifrrtud gs] D;ksafd blls fdlh Hkh izdkj dh xksiuh;rk ugha fjvfuzax vkwfqlj dysdvj pquko vf/kdkjh] tksuy vf/kdkjh] ihbklhu vf/kdkjh ;k ernku vf/kdkjh rfkk lsdvj eftlvªsv gks;k dksvokj ernkrk gks ;k jktusfrd ny fdlh Hkh O;fDr dks ernkrk dks kjhj ds vax gkfk dk mi;ksx djuk oftzr ugha dj ldrka ;g rks ges kk mi;ksxh gs] tcfd vu; pquko fpug ij oftzr gksrk gkfk Nki dks dksbz fnik ugha ldrk gs] blds fuokzpu vk;ksx vkt rd D;ksa le> ugha ik;k vr;ar vkifrrtud pquko djkrs le; D;k ernkrk dks gkfk fgykdj euk ugha fd;k tkrk gs] ikuh ekaxh ugha tkrk] ckgj tkus ds fy;s gkfk ugha fn[kk;k tkrk gs] gkfk fgykdj cqyk;k ugha tkrk] gkfk fn[kkdj vfev L;kgh ugha yxk;k tkrk] eri= ugha eksm+k tkrk] fy[kkbz ugha fd;k tkrk iksfyax cwfk ugha] fn[kk tkrk] gkfk fn[kkdj pquko fpug ugha crk;k tkrka dksu lk pquko fpug ugha crk;k tkrka dksu lk txg gs\ tgka gkfk dk iz;ksx vfkok gkfk fn[kkdj dksbz dk;z ugha fd;k tkrka ;fn dksbz ernku vf/kdkjh,slk ¼gkFk dk iz;ksx½ djrk gs ;k djrs ik;k tkrk gs rks pquko ds le; muds }kjk dksbz xksiuh;rk ugha cjrrk dgdj dk;zokgh dh tkrh gs ;k dksbz fo ks k ny dk dk;z dj jgk gs] lg;ksx dj jgk gs] dgdj le; ij dk;zokgh fd;k tkrk ;fn dksbz,tsav vfhkdrkz] ny ds dk;zdrkz ;k O;fDr,oa Lo;a meehnokj djrk gs rks okgokgh ywvrk gs] rfkk thr ij ekuo dk kks k.k djrk gs] Hkz Vkpkj dks c<+kok nsrk tks vusdtj ih& ;gfd] fnukad dks ls ;n buk;r vyh }kjk Hkkjr fuokzpu vk;ksx dks Hksts x;s i= esa fy[kk fd &^^ Hkkjrh; jk Vªh; dkaxzsl ds iatk pquko fpug dks jì fd;s tkus ckcr~ & in Øekad 1 ^^Hkkjrh; jk Vªh; dkaxzsl bafnjk xka/kh th dh ikvhz dk tks iatk pquko fpug fn;k x;k gs og Loeso vius vki esa tuizfrfuf/k vf/kfu;e,oa Hkkjr fuokzpu vk;ksx ds vf/kfu;eksa ds foijhr blfy;s lkjs Hkkjr ns k ls,oa lkjs Hkkjr ns k ds x.keku; ukxfjdksa dh xfjek dks cuk;s j[kus ds fy;s bls vfuok;z :i ls fujlr fd;k tkuk vfrvko ;d gs] iatk fpug ekuo vax esa vkrk gs vksj ;g lhkh Hkkjr ns k ds x.keku; ukxfjd ernkrkvksa dks thfor vax Hkh in Øekad 2& ^^blfy;s iatk ekuo vax gs vksj gj ernkrk bl vax ds lkfk ernku dsunz ds vanj izos k djrk gs,oa Hkkjrh; tu izfrfuf/k vf/kfu;e ds varxzr fdlh Hkh ernku dsunz ds vanj pquko fpug ysdj tkuk oftzr in Øekad 3&^^bl pquko fpug dks fof/k ds foijhr gksus ds ckotwn Hkh vius fy;s vkcafvr djk;k gs tks fd lafo/kku }kjk fuokzpu laca/kh izko/kkuksa ds foijhr gs blfy;s Hkkjrh; jk Vªh; pquko fpug dks rrdky izhkko ls fujlr fd;k tkuk pkfg;sa in Øekad 5& ^^Hkkjr ds iztkrkaf=d jktuhfrd ny ds foijhr gs,oa vfregroiw.kz fujkyk fo k; blfy;s Hkkjrh; iztkra= dks etcwr cukus ds fy;s,oa Hkkjr fuokzpu vf/kfu;eksa dks dm+s :i ls ykxw djus ds fy;s rrdky izhkko ls Hkkjrh; jk Vªh; dkaxzsl pquko fpug dks jì fd;k tkuk pkfg;sa mijksdr vkosnu dh izfr egkefge jk Vªifr] usrk izfri{k yksdlhkk] jkt;lhkk] Hkkjr fuokzpu vk;ksx dks Hksts x;s mijksdr i= vusdtj ih& ;gfd] fnukad dks t;iqj ls jkts k dqekj ct }kjk Hkkjr fuokzpu vk;ksx dks Hksts x;s vius i= esa fy[kk fd&^^bafm;u us kuy dakxzsl ikvhz ds fy;s fuokzpu izrhd gkfk dks vkjf{kr fd;s tkus laca/kh vkns k fnukad dks izr;kgfjr fd;s tkus ds laca/k esa & tuizfrfuf/k vf/kfu;e 1951 dh /kkjk 29d esa iath;u gsrq izlrqr fd;k x;ka fnukad dks Hkkjr fuokzpu vk;ksx }kjk vkns k ikfjr fd;k x;k FkkA mdr bafm;u us kuy dkaxzsl ikvhz ds egklfpo dks lacksf/kr Hkkjr fuokzpu vk;ksx ds i= Øekad 56@vkj-@6@89 fnukad ds }kjk mdr iath;u ds laca/k esa lalwfpr fd;k x;k Fkk i=ksdr Øekad 56@vkj-@6@89 fnukad ds Øe 3 ij mdr bafm;u us kuy dkaxzsl dks jk Vªh; ny dh eku;rk iznku djrs gq;s mlds fy;s fuokzpu izrhd ds :i esa ^^gkfk** dks vkjf{kr fd;k x;k FkkA lqyhk lanhkz,oa izek.k gsarq i=ksdr Øekad 56@vkj-@6@89 fnukad dh Nk;kizfr vuqyxud&1 fpfugr dj bl izfrosnu ds lkfk layxu dh xbz mdr fuokzpu izrhd vkj{k.k vkns k ds i pkr~ fuokzpu vk;ksx }kjk iz[;kfir dh xbz vf/klwpuk la[;k 56@2009@ihih,l&II fnukafdr ds }kjk rrdkyhu izo`r vf/klwpuk la[;k fnukafdr dh lkj.kh&i ds Øe&5 ij mdr lkj.kh ds dkye 2 esa ^^bafm;u us kuy dkaxzsl** mdr lkj.kh &I ds dkye 3 esa ^^gkfk** vafdr fd;k x;k mijksdr i= vusdtj ih& ;gfd] R. Muthrasan rfyeukmq ls fnukad dks Hksts x;s vius i= esa Hkkjr fuokzpu vk;ksx,oa jkt; fuokzpu vk;ksx psuubz dks Hksts x;s vkosnu esa fy[kk x;k fd&^^the Election Commission allots election symbols for the recognized political parties both in the State and Central level.in that basis, Human Hand has been allotted as the Election Symbol for the Indian National Congress party. The Indian National congress party is using Human Hand Symbol. mijksdr i= vusdtj ih&155 40

41 151- ;gfd] fnukad dks e/kqlwnu eaxy t;iqj jktlfkku ls Hksts x;s vius i= esa Hkkjr fuokzpu vk;ksx dks fy[kk fd pquko fpug ij vkifrr],d jk Vªh; ny dks gkfk ds iats dk pquko fpug vkcafvr fd;k gqvk ernku dsunz esa eri= ds vykok pquko fpug u jgs bl gsrq i;kzir O;oLFkk dh tkrh gs ekuo vax gkfk dks pquko fpug ds :i esa eku;rk nsuk fu i{k pquko izfø;k ij,d iz u fpug gs] vkifrrtud vr% fuosnu gs fd gkfk ds iats dh pquko fpug ds :i es eku;rk lekir dj fuokzpu vk;ksx Lora= fu i{k pquko izfø;k ds izrhd vklfkk dks lecy iznku djsaa mijksdr i= vusdtj ih& ;gfd] fnukad dks iksjdkye,l-,e-jktk psuubz }kjk Hksts x;s vius i= esa gkfk ds iats dks fujlr djus ds laca/k esa eq[; fuokzpu vk;ksx] jkt; fuokzpu vk;ksx psuubz dks fn;k x;k vkosnu vusdtj ih& ;gfd] fnukad dks Hkkjr fuokpzu vk;ksx ds vamj lsøsvjh Jh izeksn kekz }kjk fn;s x;s vius tckc esa Jh eukshkko f=ikbh eqcabz dks Hksts x;s vius i= esa fy[kk x;k fd &^^Ban on the use of Indian National Congress and Natio nalist Congress Party flag Regarding. I am directed to refer to your letter dated , on the subject cited above and to inform that party Flags not allotted by the Commission. Further, as regard the flag of Indian National Congress, your attention is invited to the Order dateed of the Hon ble Supreme Court in SLP No. 6195/2004(B. Krishna Bhatt Vs. UOI and Ors.) mijksdr i= vusdtj ih& ;gfd] fnukad dks Hkkjr fuokpzu vk;ksx ds vamj lsøsvjh Jh izeksn kekz }kjk fn;s x;s vius tckc esa MkW- jke tkoys egkjk Vª dks Hksts x;s vius i= esa fy[kk x;k fd& ^^ Suggestion to change the flag of all political parties so as to contain tricolour as background regarding. Your letter dated nil, received on , on the subject cited above and to inform that party flags are not allotted by the Commission. Though the Commission appreciates are sentiments, the Commission cannot direct political parties to have their flag of particular colours on designs. mijksdr i= vusdtj ih& ;gfd] fnukad dks Hkkjr fuokpzu vk;ksx ds vamj lsøsvjh Jh izeksn kekz }kjk fn;s x;s vius tckc esa Jh,l- ds ko ih- iq.ks dks Hksts x;s vius i= esa fy[kk x;k fd &^^Ban on the use of Indian National Congress and Natio nalist Congress Party flag Regarding. I am directed to refer to your letter dated , on the subject cited above and to inform that party Flags not allotted by the Commission. Further, as regard the flag of Indian National Congress, your attention is invited to the Order dateed of the Hon ble Supreme Court in SLP No. 6195/2004(B. Krishna Bhatt Vs. UOI and Ors.) mijksdr i= vusdtj ih& ;gfd] fnukad dks Hkkjr fuokpzu vk;ksx ds vamj lsøsvjh Jh izeksn kekz }kjk fn;s x;s vius tckc esa Jh MkW- rhjfk xxz iatkc dks Hksts x;s vius i= esa fy[kk x;k fd &^^Petition to prevent the use of Indian National Congress flag and ban on the Hand symbol of Indian National Congress Regarding dated , on the subject cited above. In the petition, you have requested that use of the flag by Indian National Congress with the tricolour and the symbol Hand be banned, the Indian National Congress be de-recognised and the symbol Hand be frozen. You have stated that state that since the Indian National Cogress was not in existence during the period of , the judgement of the Supreme Court given in the case of B. Krishna Bhatt Vs. UOI & Ors. cannot apply to Indian National Congress. As regards the issue of flag of Indian National Congress, at the outset, it is informed that the Party Flags are not allotted by the Commission. So far as applicability of the judgement of Supreme Court in respect of flag of Indian National Congress is concerned, the fact is that during , there was a dispute between the two groups of Indian National congress both claiming to be the real Indian National congress. Therefore, as an interim measure, pending final orders in the matter, vide Commission s Orders dated and , the two groups of the party were granted interim recognition under different names. Thereafter by its final Order dated , held that the group led b y Smt. Indira Gandhi was recognized by the Election Commission of India as the Indian National Congress. Therefore, if is wrong to contend that during the period there was no Indian National Congress and there is no applicability of the order in Bhatt s case. The order of the Hon ble Supreme Court in aforesaid Bhatt s case was pronouneed on i.e. long after the dispute was decided and when the party was using the present falg. mijksdr i= vusdtj ih&161 ;gfd] MkW- rhjfk xxz }kjk Hkkjr fuokzpu vk;ksx vius i= esa bf.m;u us kuy dkaxzsl }kjk jk Vªh; /ot dk mi;ksx djus ds laca/k esa fy[kk x;k gs tks vusdtj ih& 162,oa vusdtj ih& ;gfd] fnukad dks Hkkjr fuokpzu vk;ksx ds vamj lsøsvjh Jh izeksn kekz }kjk fn;s x;s vius tckc esa Jh MkW- uwru Bkdqj y[kuå dks Hksts x;s vius i= esa fy[kk x;k fd &^^As regards the flag of Indian National Congress, your attention is invited to the order dated of the Hon ble Supreme Court in SLP No. 6195/2004 (B. Krishna Bhatt Vs. UOI and Ors.). It is also informed that the recognition and derecogntion of political parties depends upon the poll performance of political parties and para 16A of the Election Symbols (Reservation and Allotment) Order, mijksdr i= vusdtj ih&164 ;gfd] fnukad dks Jh uwru Bkdqj y[kuå }kjk Hkkjr fuokpzu vk;ksx dks fn;s x;s vius vkosnu esa dkaxzsl ikvhz }kjk jk Vªh; /ot ds jaxksa dk mi;ksx djus vksj pø ds LFkku ij ikvhz fuokzpu fpug Nkius ds laca/k esa,oa gkfk fuokzpu fpug ds mi;ksx ds ckjs esa vksj mijksdr vkosnu ij kh?kz dk;zokgh djus ds laca/k esa fy[kk x;k gs tks vusdtj ih& ;gfd] fnukad dks Hkkjr fuokpzu vk;ksx ds vamj lsøsvjh Jh izeksn kekz }kjk fn;s x;s vius tckc esa Jherh euh kk kekz,moksdsv Xokfy;j ds uksfvl fnukad ds laca/k esa Hksts x;s vius i= esa fy[kk x;k 41

42 fd &^^Ban on the Use of Indian National Congress Flag and to freeze its symbol Hand Regrading. ftlesa The Hon ble Supreme Court in SLP No. 6195/2004 (B. Krishna Bhatt Vs. UOI and Ors.). vksj gkfk ds laca/k esa mugksaus fy[kk fd fuokzpu vk;ksx }kjk vusdksa fpug,sls gksrs gs tks ernku dsunz esa ekstwn jgrs gs tsls ia[kk] Vsfcy] dqlhz] LVwy]?kM+h] badikwv vksj isu vkfn ekstwn jgrs gs dgrs gq;s fy[kk fd In view of the position explained above the relief claimed by you cannot be granted. mijksdr i= vusdtj ih& ;gfd] fnukad dks Hkkjr fuokpzu vk;ksx ds vamj lsøsvjh Jh izeksn kekz }kjk fn;s x;s vius tckc esa Jh dsyk k punz banksj ds i= fnukad ds laca/k esa Hksts x;s vius i= esa fy[kk x;k fd &^^ Ban on the Use of Indian National Congress Flag and to freeze its symbol Hand Regrading. ftlesa The Hon ble Supreme Court in SLP No. 6195/2004 (B. Krishna Bhatt Vs. UOI and Ors.). vksj gkfk ds laca/k esa mugksaus fy[kk fd fuokzpu vk;ksx }kjk vusdksa fpug,sls gksrs gs tks ernku dsunz esa ekstwn jgrs gs tsls ia[kk] Vsfcy] dqlhz] LVwy]?kM+h] badikwv vksj isu vkfn ekstwn jgrs gs dgrs gq;s fy[kk fd In view of the position explained above the relief claimed by you cannot be granted. mijksdr i= vusdtj ih& ;gfd] fnukad dks f ko kadj frokjh }kjk Hkkjr fuokpzu vk;ksx dks fn;s x;s vius vkosnu esa mugksaus fy[kk fd Hkkjrh; jk Vªh; /ot ds jktusfrd mi;ksx ds laca/k esa fy[kk x;k ftlesa jk Vªh; dkaxzsl ikvhz }kjk pj[ks ds LFkku ij gkfk ds iats dk mi;ksx fd;k x;k gs mijksdr i= vusdtj ih&168 ;gfd] Hkkjr fuokzpu vk;ksx ds vamj lsøsvjh Jh izeksn dqekj kekz }kjk Hksts x;s vius tcko esa fy[kk x;k fd Dated , on the subject cited above. It may be noted that the issue of flag of Indian National Congress was raised before the Hon ble Supreme Courtm, and the Apex Court vide its Order dated [SLP No. 6195/2004 (B. Krishna Bhatt Vs. UOI and Ors.)] dismissed the petition. In view of the above, the relief calimed by you connot be granted. mijksdr i= vusdtj ih& ;gfd] MkW- jfounz dqekj] jk;iqj NRrhlx<+ ls Hksts x;s vius i= esa Hkkjr ljdkj lalnh; dk;z ea=ky; ds vij lfpo Jh txnh k dqekj }kjk fuokzpu vk;ksx dks dk;zokgh djus gsrq Hkstk x;k i= vusdtj ih& ;gfd] Hkkjr ljdkj ds vamj lsøsvjh }kjk fnukad dks jke fujatu xksm ubz fnyyh }kjk Hksts x;s vkosnu dks ewyr% nlrkostksa lfgr Hkkjr fuokzpu vk;ksx dks vko ;d dk;zokgh djus gsrq Hkstk x;ka mijksdr i= vusdtj ih& ubz fnyyh flfkr,d lkekftd lalfkk lerk vkunksyu }kjk Hkkjr fuokzpu vk;ksx dks fn;s x;s vkosnu fnukad ds vuqlkj & **ernkrkvksa ls Ny] div] /kks[kk],oa nqjkpj.k djus okyh ikvhz Hkkjrh; jk Vªh; dkaxzsl dk pquko fpug tcr djus dh ;kfpdka mijksdr i= vusdtj ih& ;gfd] fnukad dks Hkkjr fuokpzu vk;ksx ds vamj lsøsvjh Jh ohjsunz dqekj }kjk fn;s x;s vius tckc esa Jh MkW- rhjfk xxz iatkc dks Hksts x;s vius i= esa fy[kk x;k fd &^^Ban of use of Indian National Congress Flag and derecognition of the party Regarding. It is also informed that the recognition and derecognition of political parties entirely depend upon the poll performance of political parties and para 16A of the Election Symbol (Reservation & Allotment) Order, In view of the above, the relief claimed by you cannot be granted. mijksdr i= vusdtj ih& ;gfd] eukshko f=ikbh eqcabz }kjk egkefge jk Vªifr] eq[; pquko vk;qdr dks Hksts x;s vius i= esa jk Vªh; /ot mi;ksx jktuhfr esa fd;s tkus ds laca/k esa jksd yxkus gsrq fy[kk x;ka mijksdr i= vusdtj ih& ;gfd] iq.ks dh,d lkekftd lalfkk dukzvd ernkj la?k }kjk Hkkjr fuokzpu vk;ksx dks fy[ks x;s i= fnukad esa dkaxzsl ikvhz ds >.Ms ds laca/k esa fn;k x;k vksj dgk x;k fd jk Vªh; /ot dk mi;ksx ikvhz /ot ds :i esa fd;s tkus ds laca/k esa jksd yxk;s tk;sa mijksdr i= vusdtj ih& ;gfd] lekt lsoh lalfkk ekuo mrd kz lerk lsokhkkoh lalfkku egkjk Vª }kjk fn;s x;s vius vkosnu esa Hkkjr fuokzpu vk;ksx dks fy[ks x;s i= fnukad dks izkir i= esa dkaxzsl ikvhz ds >.Ms ds laca/k esa fn;k x;k vksj dgk x;k fd jk Vªh; /ot dk mi;ksx ikvhz /ot ds :i esa fd;s tkus ds laca/k esa jksd yxk;s tk;sa mijksdr i= vusdtj ih& ;gfd] Hkkjr fuokzpu vk;ksx ds vamj lsøsvjh Jh izeksn dqekj kekz }kjk fnukad dks Jh uohu ; k caxyksj }kjk fy[ks x;s vkosnu fnukad dk tcko fn;k ftlesa **Freezing of the Symbol Hand of Indian National Congress regarding. I am directed to refer to your letters dated on the subject cited above. In this context, it is information that the symbol Hand has been reserved symbol of the Indian National Congress for more than three deeades. It was an election symbol even before it was allotted to the Indian National Congress. Just because Hand is a part of the human body, it is not suffiecient enough reason to object to it as an election symbol. mijksdr i= vusdtj ih& ;gfd] fnukad dks MkW vk kh k HkÍkpk;Z ubz fnyyh }kjk Hkkjr fuokzpu vk;ksx ds Jh vkj-ds- JhokLro izhafliy lsøsvjh,oa eq[; fuokzpu vf/kdkjh dks fy[ks x;s vius i= esa dgk x;k fd &^^aorder dated bearing reference no. 464/UP-LA/2012. This is further to your detailed order dated 08 th January, 2012, bearing reference no. 464/UP-LA/2012 in continuation of your earlier order dated which inter alia stated as follows: However, at the time of elections, the Commission would, no boubt, take appropriate steps and measures to see that the statues of Ms. Mayawati and BSP s symbol elephant do not disturb the level playing field and give undue advantage to BSP vis-a-vis other political plarties. I further note your refrence to the presently pending Writ Petition (Civil) No. 266 of 2009 (Ravi Kant and Anr V. State of Uttar 42

43 Pradesh and others), before the Hon ble Suprme Court of India and the pleading, proceeding and order related thereto. We further note your present order date 08 th January 2012, bearing reference no. 464/UP- LA/2012, which inter alia. The Commission, after taking all the aspects of the matter into consideration, and considereingthe need to ensure level playing filed for all political parties and candidates in the interest of free and fair election, has directed that each and every statue of elephant and each and every statute of Ms. Mayawati, Constructed/erected in public place in the state of Uttar Pradesh, at a government expense, which were the subject matter of the abovementioned writ petition No. 266 of 2006 before the Hon ble Supreme Court, shall be suitably covered so as to ensure that these statues do not influence the minds of the electros distributing the level playing filed during t he current general election to the Uttar Pradesh Legislative Assembly. The expense for covering the statues will be borne by the local authorities under whose jurisdiction the various statues have been erected. The whole work of veiling the statues shall be completed by 5PM on 11 th Januar, The District Election officer of the Districts concerned shall submit to the Commission a compliance report in this regard by 7PM on 11 th January, mijksdr i= vusdtj ih& ;gfd] Hkkjr fuokzpu vk;ksx ds vamj lsøsvjh izeksn kekz }kjk Jh jfo kekz,moksdsv pamhx<+ dks fnukad dk tckc fnukad dks vk;ksx }kjk fn;k x;k &^^The order dated of Hon ble Supreme Court is SLP No. 6195/2004 (B. Krishna Bhatt Vs. UOI & Ors). Further, you are also infomed that recognition and derecognition of political parties is based on the poll performance of political parties as provided under Paragraphs 6A and 6B and in terms of para 16A of the Election Symbol (Reservation & Allotment) Order As regarding de-registration of the party, your attention is invited to the judgment of the Hon ble Supreme Court in Indian National Congress(1) Vs. Institute of Social Welfare & Other [(2002) 5 SCC 685]. Whereby it has been held by the apex court that the Commission does not have power to de-register any political party on complaints of violation of any law.. mijksdr i= dk tckc vusdtj ih& ;gfd] Hkkjr fuokzpu vk;ksx ds vamj lsøsvjh izeksn kekz }kjk Jh jks ku yky diwj] ubz fnyyh dks fnukad dk tckc fnukad dks vk;ksx }kjk fn;k x;k& ^^The flag of Indian National Congress, your attention is invited to the order dated of the Hon ble Supreme Court in SLP No. 6195/2004 (B.Krishna Bhatt Vs. UOI and Ors.) In view of the above, the relief claimed by you cannot be granted. mijksdr i= vusdtj ih& ;gfd] jkefujatu xksj ubz fnyyh }kjk fnukad dks Hkkjr fuokzpu vk;ksx dks dkaxzsl ikvhz ds >ams vksj gkfk pquko fpug ds laca/k esa vkosnu fn;k ftldk tckc izeksn dqekj kekz }kjk fn;s x;s vius vkosnu fnukad tks vusdtj ih& ;gfd] Nh:yky dqegkj chdkusj }kjk fnukad ] dks Hkkjr fuokzpu vk;ksx dks dkaxzsl ikvhz ds >ams vksj gkfk pquko fpug ds laca/k esa vkosnu fn;k ftldk tckc izeksn dqekj kekz }kjk fn;s x;s vius vkosnu fnukad ] tks vusdtj ih&182] ;gfd] rhjfk xxz iatkc }kjk fnukad dks Hkkjr fuokzpu vk;ksx dks dkaxzsl ikvhz ds >ams vksj gkfk pquko fpug ds laca/k esa vkosnu fn;k ftldk tckc izeksn dqekj kekz }kjk fn;s x;s vius vkosnu fnukad tks vusdtj ih& ;gfd] Sanjay Nagyan Uttrakhand }kjk fnukad dks Hkkjr fuokzpu vk;ksx dks dkaxzsl ikvhz ds >ams vksj gkfk pquko fpug ds laca/k esa vkosnu fn;k ftldk tckc izeksn dqekj kekz }kjk fn;s x;s vius vkosnu fnukad tks vusdtj ih& ;gfd] Gaurhari Mahapatra Chattisgarh }kjk fnukad dks Hkkjr fuokzpu vk;ksx dks dkaxzsl ikvhz ds >ams vksj gkfk pquko fpug ds laca/k esa vkosnu fn;k ftldk tckc izeksn dqekj kekz }kjk fn;s x;s vius vkosnu fnukad tks vusdtj ih& ;gfd] Hkh:yky eanlksj e-iz- }kjk fnukad dks Hkkjr fuokzpu vk;ksx dks dkaxzsl ikvhz ds >ams vksj gkfk pquko fpug ds laca/k esa vkosnu fn;k ftldk tckc izeksn dqekj kekz }kjk fn;s x;s vius vkosnu fnukad tks vusdtj ih& ;gfd] Sanjay Nagyan Uttrakhand }kjk fnukad dks Hkkjr fuokzpu vk;ksx dks dkaxzsl ikvhz ds >ams vksj gkfk pquko fpug ds laca/k esa vkosnu fn;k ftldk tckc ohjsunz dqekj }kjk fn;s x;s vius vkosnu fnukad tks vusdtj ih& ;gfd] vfuy dqekj xqirk mrrjk[k.m }kjk fnukad dks Hkkjr fuokzpu vk;ksx dks dkaxzsl ikvhz ds >ams vksj gkfk pquko fpug ds laca/k esa vkosnu fn;k ftldk tckc ohjsunz dqekj] izeksn dqekj kekz }kjk fn;s x;s vius vkosnu fnukad ] tks vusdtj ih&189] ;gfd] jkds k dqekj ik.ms bykgkckn }kjk fnukad dks Hkkjr fuokzpu vk;ksx dks dkaxzsl ikvhz ds >ams vksj gkfk pquko fpug ds laca/k esa vkosnu fn;k ftldk tckc ohjsunz dqekj }kjk fn;s x;s vius vkosnu fnukad tks vusdtj ih& ;gfd] fouksn dqekj xxz NRrhlx<+ }kjk fnukad dks Hkkjr fuokzpu vk;ksx dks dkaxzsl ikvhz ds >ams vksj gkfk pquko fpug ds laca/k esa vkosnu fn;k ftldk tckc ohjsunz dqekj] izeksn dqekj kekz }kjk fn;s x;s vius vkosnu fnukad ] tks vusdtj ih&192]

44 182- ;gfd] lqjs k cgknqj jke bykgkckn }kjk fnukad dks Hkkjr fuokzpu vk;ksx dks dkaxzsl ikvhz ds >ams vksj gkfk pquko fpug ds laca/k esa vkosnu fn;k ftldk tckc ohjsunz dqekj }kjk fn;s x;s vius vkosnu fnukad tks vusdtj ih& ;gfd] Sanjay Nagyan Uttrakhand }kjk fnukad dks Hkkjr fuokzpu vk;ksx dks dkaxzsl ikvhz ds >ams vksj gkfk pquko fpug ds laca/k esa vkosnu fn;k ftldk tckc izeksn dqekj kekz }kjk fn;s x;s vius vkosnu fnukad tks vusdtj ih& ;gfd] rksiflag cq)k mrrjizns k }kjk fnukad dks Hkkjr fuokzpu vk;ksx dks dkaxzsl ikvhz ds >ams vksj gkfk pquko fpug ds laca/k esa vkosnu fn;k ftldk tckc izeksn dqekj kekz }kjk fn;s x;s vius vkosnu fnukad tks vusdtj ih& ;gfd] jkds k dqekj ik.ms bykgkckn }kjk fnukad dks Hkkjr fuokzpu vk;ksx dks dkaxzsl ikvhz ds >ams vksj gkfk pquko fpug ds laca/k esa vkosnu fn;k ftldk tckc izeksn dqekj kekz }kjk fn;s x;s vius vkosnu fnukad tks vusdtj ih& ;gfd] lqjs k cgknqj jke bykgkckn }kjk fnukad dks Hkkjr fuokzpu vk;ksx dks dkaxzsl ikvhz ds >ams vksj gkfk pquko fpug ds laca/k esa vkosnu fn;k ftldk tckc izeksn dqekj kekz }kjk fn;s x;s vius vkosnu fnukad tks vusdtj ih&197 ;gfd] lqjs k cgknqj bykgkckn }kjk Hkkjr fuokzpu vk;ksx dks Hksts x;s i= esa dkaxzsl ikvhz dk pquko fpug gkfk,oa ikvhz /ot frjaxs ds laca/k esa vkosnu fn;ka ¼1½ dkaxzsl ikvhz dk pquko fpug gkfk dk iatk pquko dh vkpkj lafgrk dk myya?ku djrk pquko dh vkpkj lafgrk vuqlkj iksfyax cwfk esa fdlh Hkh ikvhz dk pquko fpug ysdj tkuk cftzr dkaxzsl,oa gj ikvhz dk ernkrk dkaxzsl ds pquko fpug gkfk dk iatk dks ewrz:i esa ysdj iksfyax cwfk esa izos k dkrl ¼2½ fdlh Hkh ikvhz dk pquko fpug,slk ugha gksuk pkfg,a gj ikvhz ds gj ernkrk ds ikl leku :i esa gksa dkaxzsl dk pquko fpug gkfk dk iatk izr;sd ernkrk ds ikl pkgs og fdlh Hkh ikvhz dk gksa ¼3½ Hkkjr dk izr;sd O;fDr pkgs og cppkk gks ;k cw<+k] L=h gks ;k iq: k ;k uiqald lhkh ds ikl gkfk dk iatk gs tks izr;{k ;k vizr;{k :i esa dkaxzsl ikvhz dk izpkj djrk gs,slk gksuk vkpkj lafgrk dk myya?ku ¼4½ Hkkjrh; yksdra= esa fdlh Hkh O;fDr tks orzeku esa ernkrk gs ;k Hkfo ; esa ernkrk cusxk ds fdlh Hkh vax dk pquko fpug ds :i esa iz;ksx djuk pquko dh vkpkj lafgrk dk myya?ku gksxka ;g ekuo vax dh rldjh djus tslk vijk/k ¼5½ iksfyax cwfk esa csbk ernku izfø;k laiuu djkus okyk dkaxzslh er dk O;fDr iatk fn[kkdj vf/kd ernkrk dks iksfyax cwfk esa vkus ls jksdrk tks bu Mk;jsDV :i esa dkaxzsl dks er nsus ds fy, izsfjr djrk ¼6½ fofhkuu ikvhz ds izr;k kh u pkgrs gq, Hkh kjhj ds vax ds :i esa dkaxzsl dk pquko fpug gkfk dk iatk dkaxszl ikvhz dk izpkj izlkj djus ds fy, ck/; gksrk blls vkpk lafgrk dk myya?ku gksrk >am+k %& dkaxzsl dk ikvhz igpku fpug frjaxk vkifrrtud gs D;ksafd %& ¼1½ frjaxk >am+k ds rhuksa jax Hkkjr ds igpku dk izrhd fpug bls dksbz ikvhz fo ks k vius ikvhz fgr ds fy;s iz;ksx ugha dj ldrha frjaxk >am+k Hkkjr dh v[k.mrk dk izrhd bls blrseky dj dksbz ikvhz v[k.m Hkkjr dks [kf.mr djus dk vijk/k djrh gs tks n.muh; gs rfkk vkpkj lafgrk dk myya?ku ¼2½ frjaxs dks dkaxzsl ikvhz viuh ikvhz dk igpku fpug cukdj Hkkjr dh turk dh Hkkoukvksa dks viuh ikvhz ds fgr esa blrseky djrh blls pquko vkpkj lafgrk dk myya?ku gksrk ¼3½ frjaxk >am+k esa Hkkjr ds tu tu dh vkrek jph clh bls Hkkjr dh dkaxzsl viuh ikvhz ds fgr esa iz;ksx djrh blls Hkkjr dh turk dh vkrek dks Bsl igq prh ¼4½ frjaxs ds lkfk HkkoukRed yxko ds dkj.k u pkgrs gq, Hkh yksx dkaxzsl ikvhz dks ernku djus ds fy, etcwj gksrs yksxksa dks HkkoukRed :i ls etcwj djuk pquko lafgrk dk myya?ku ¼5½ frjaxs dk iz;ksx dj dkaxzsl ikvhz vius vusd xyr fø;kvksa,oa fu.kz;ksa }kjk Hkkjr dh turk dks ekufld,oa vkfred vk?kkr igqapkrh dqn yksx ekufld,oa vkfred vk?kkr dks cnkzlr ugha dj ikrs os yksx ikvhz dk >am+k] osuj] Qwadrs blls Hkkjr dh igpku frjaxs >am+s dk vieku gksrk blls pquko dh vkpkj lafgrk myyaf?kr gksrh ¼6½ dkaxzsl ikvhz vius dks **Hkkjrh; jk Vªh; dkaxzsl** dgrh,slk dguk Hkzked izpkj djuk Hkkjrh; jk Vªh; dkaxzsl dh LFkkiuk Hkkjr dh vktknh dh ym+kbz ds fy, dh xbz FkhA bl ds lkfk ml le; dk iwjk Hkkjr FkkA vkt dh dkaxzsl O;fDr fo ks k vfkkzr~ bafnjk dkaxzsl gs tks oa k ijeijk oknh,d ifjokj ds fu;a=.k esa gs tks ;su dsu izdkjs.k turk ij kklu djrh jgh **Hkkjrh; jk Vªh; dkaxzsl** vktknh ds ckn Hkkjr ds lkfk lekir gks xbz FkhA Hkkjrh; x.kra= ds eq[; pquko vk;qdr egksn; th ;fn vki dks dkaxzsl ikvhz dk fpug frjaxk] pquko fpug iatk pquko dh vkpkj lafgrk dk myya?ku djrk ugha izrhr gksrk gs rks vki vkosnd dh ubz ikvhz **vktkn x.kra= ikvhz**dks ikvhz igpku fpug frjaxk rfkk ikvhz fpug ckw;sa gkfk dk iatk iznku djus dh dìk djsaa tks vusdtkj ih& ;gfd] dsyk k flag iks;k NRrhlx<+ }kjk fnukad dks Hkkjr fuokzpu vk;ksx dks dkaxzsl ikvhz ds >ams vksj gkfk pquko fpug ds laca/k esa vkosnu fn;k ftldk tckc izeksn dqekj kekz }kjk fn;s x;s vius vkosnu fnukad tks vusdtj ih& ;gfd] ukxs k jko }kjk eq[; fuokzpu vk;qdr Hkkjr fuokzpu vk;ksx dks fy[ks x;s vius i= fnukad es fy[kk fd vki gh dk;nk gs u rks fuom.kwd d{k esa ikvhz dk fu kku ugha ys tkuk pkfg, fqj ;g dkaxzsl iatk 44

45 fuom.kwd d{k esa tkrk gs tcko gq, ernkrkvksa ds ikl gkfk dk iatk gkfk esa gh yxk gs vc le>;s dkaxzsl dk iatk dsls fuom.kwd d{k easa tkrk gs ;g gqok uk fuom.kwd fu;e dk HkaxA fdlh Hkh jktkdh; ikvhz dks fuom.kwd fpug balku ds ftle dk dksbz Hkh Hkkx u fn;k tk;a eq[; pquko vk;qdr Hkkjr fuokzpu dks fy[kk x;k i= tks vusdtj ih& ;gfd] MkW- gjh kadj yky fo kfkhz fl)kfkz uxj m-iz- }kjk fnukad dks eq[; fuokzpu vk;ksx dks fn;s x, vius vkosnu esa fy[kk x;k fd &** fnukad 3 twu 2010 dks laiuu gksus okys fo/kku lhkk pquko ds mipquko esa bafm;u us kuy dkaxzsl ikvhz ds gkfk ds iats ds izpkj izlkj gsrq ftl ijps dk forj.k turk esa fd;k tk Fkk mldh Nk;kizfr bl vkosnu ds lkfk laykxu gs vkifrr dh lwpuk vko ;d dk;zokgh gsrq ftyk vf/kdkjh fl)kfkz uxj rfkk iqfyl v/kh{kd dks nh xbz FkhA ukxsunz dqekj us viuh vkifrr ls iathd`r i= }kjk bafm;u us kuy dkaxzsl ikvhz ds pquko fpug esa la kks/ku djus,oa fnukad dks fo/kkulhkk pquko esa,d i= fnukad dks gh fuokzpu vf/kdkjh fl)kfkz uxj ds }kjk izsf kr fd;k fd pquko fpug gkfk ds iats ij vko ;d dk;zokgh dj jksd yxk;h tk;saa** mijksdr i= tks vusdtj ih& ;gfd] nhiflag cks) iap khyuxj m-iz- }kjk fnukad dks egkefge jk Vªifr] jkt;iky m-iz-] pquko vk;qdr dks Hksts x;s i= esa fy[kk fd & **jk Vªh; pquko vk;ksx tks fu i{k gksus dk nkok djrk ysfdu dkaxzsl ikvhz i{k/kj D;ksa gs tcfd jk Vªh; ikvhz vusd gs dkaxzsl ikvhz dk >.Mk jk Vªh; >.Ms dh udy djrk gs vksj jk Vªh; >.Ms tslk fn[krk blls ns k dh turk dks Bxk tkrk gs vksj turk dks yxrk gs fd dsoy dkaxzsl gh jk Vªh; ikvhz gs pwafd dkaxzsl dk >am+k jk Vªh; >am+s tslk esjh pquko vk;ksx ls vihy gs fd dkaxzsl ds >am+s dks ;k rks nks jax dk fd;k tk;sa ;k pkj jax dk fd;k tk;s ftlls fd i{krk vk;s vksj Hkz Vrk lekir gks vksj dkaxzsl dk jk Vª eka gksus dk lekir gksa** mijksdr i= tks vusdtj ih& ;gfd] fouksn dqekj xxz NRrhlx<+ ls fuokzpu vk;ksx dks Hksts x;s vius i= fnukad esa dkaxzsl ikvhz ds jk Vªh; /ot ds laca/k esa ys[k fd;k gs & Our prestigious National Flag is mae of three colour Saffron, White & Green with AShok Chakra in middle. To the common people, the colours are improtant as it is visually displayed the mark inside it is not of important. (a) This is miuses of colours of Nationl Flag by political parties and they get undue advantage of being National Pride. (b) It is appealed that three colour combination be banned from using by Political Parties. mijksdr i= tks vusdtj ih& ;gfd] jkds k ukfk bykgkckn }kjk fnukad dks eq[; fuokzpu vk;qdr dks Hksts x;s vius i= esa fy[kk fd & **Hkkjrh; jk Vªh; dkaxzsl ds pquko fpug dslfj;k] lqsn] gjh ifí;ksa ds e/; esa iatk fpug ls jk Vªh; /ot dk vkieku gksus ds lanhkz esaa mi;qzdr jk Vªh; jktuhfrd ny dkaxzsl dk pquko fpug tks dslfj;k jax] lqsn jax] gjs jax dh ifí;ksa ds chp iatk pquko fpug vafdr fd;k x;k gs iwjh rjg jk Vªh; /ot dk vieku fuokj.k vf/k dk myyka?ku D;ksafd bl vf/k- ds Li Vhdj.k 4¼p½ esa Li V myys[k gs fd Hkkjrh; jk Vªh; /ot ij fdlh izdkj dk vadu djuk Hkkjrh; jk Vªh; /ot ds vieku dh Js.kh esa vkrk blds vfrfjdr mlh vf/k- esa Li Vhdj.k 2 esa vfhko;fdr Hkkjrh; jk Vªh; /ot dks ifjhkkf kr fd;k x;k Hkkjrh; jk Vªh; /ot ds varxzr Hkkjrh; jk Vªh; /ot ;k mlds fdlh Hkkx dk fdlh Hkh inkfkz ls cuk;k x;k ;k fdlh inkfkz ij :fir fp=] jaxfp= ;k QksVks ;k vu; n` ;eku :i.k vkrk bl ifjhkk kk ls Li V gs fd Hkkjrh; jk Vªh; /ot ij iatk pquko fpug vafdr dj Hkkjrh; jk Vªh; dkaxzsl jk Vªh; ny dks mi;qzdr pquko fpug dks dsunzh; pquko vk;ksx us eku;rk iznku dh x;h tks iwjh rjg vos/kkfud gs rfkk jk Vªh; /ot vieku fuokj.k vf/k dh /kkjkvksa dks vkdf kzr dj jgk ;gfd pquko vk;ksx {ks=h; ny c-l-ik- ds }kjk fufezr gkffk;ksa dks <adus ds fy, iksyhffku dh O;oLFkk fd;k fdurq Hkkjrh; jk Vªh; dkaxzsl ds pquko fpug ij /;ku ugha fn;k fd Hkkjrh; jk Vªh; /ot dh rhu ifí;ksa ds chp pø gvkdj iatk pqukofpug dks fdl vk/kkj ij eku;rk fn;k gs] bl pqukofpug dks ¼tks rhu ifí;ksa ij vk/kkfjr gks½ vfoyac fujlr djds fdlh vu; jax ds ijr ij iatk pquko fpug dks eku;rk fn;k tkuk pkfg,a tks fd os/k gks] mi;qzdr pquko fpug esa jk Vªh; /ot vieku fuokj.k vf/k dks vuns[kk vkijkf/kd d`r;ksa dks c<+kok fn;k tk jgk gs,oa mi;qzdr jktuhfrd ny ds jk Vªh; vf/k- ds fo:) fof/kd dk;zokgh vr;ar vko ;d gs vksj fopkjk.kh; izkfkhz mi;qzdr vkijkf/kd d`r; ls {kqc/k gs vksj blfy, fof/kd dk;z gsrq izkfkzuk i= ns jgk gwaa vr% Jheku th ls izkfkzuk gs fd mi;qzdr ekeys esa egksn; th xgjkbz ls fopkj djsa orzeku m-iz- fo/kkulhkk pqukoksa ds eísutj,oa Hkfo ; ds fy, pquko fpug ¼iatk½ fujlr dj mfpr fof/kd dk;zokgh djus dh dìk djsaa** mijksdr i= tks vusdtj ih& ;gfd] ekuuh; mpp U;k;ky; bykgkckn }kjk fnukad dks tufgr ;kfpdk 2630@2012 /khjt izrki flag cuke Hkkjr fuokzpu vk;ksx esa ikfjr vkns k & We have heard learned counsel for the petitioner, Shri Shambhu Chopra, learned counsel for respondent No. 1 the chief Election Commissioner and Shri Ravi Kant, learned Senior Advocate for the proposed intervenor, the Bahujan Samaj Party (for short, the BSP ) and Sri. M.S. Pipersenia, learned Standing Counsel for the State of U.P. It may be noted that earlier the petitioner had filed a petition in public interest, which was allowed to be withdrawn by a Bench of this Court consisting of Hon ble the chief Justice Rafat Alam and Justice Ranvijay Singh on , after passing the following order: Learned counsel for the petitioner when with the objection raised by the other side that this petition is not in conformity with the Rules of the court as the petitioner has not disclosed his credentials and other details as required under the Allahabad High Court (Amendment) Rules, 2010, sought leave of his Court to withdraw this petition with the liberty to file another petition with proper pleading and prayers. Prayer is allowed. This petition is, accordingly, dismissed as withdrawn with the above liberty. For meeting the 45

46 objections raised in the earlier order of this Court dated that the petitioner has not disclosed his credentials and other deatails as required under the Allahabad High Court Amendment Rules, 2010, the petitioner in the present petition mentions that he is a graduate from the Kanpur University and at present residing at Allahabad and is living out of the income from his parental properties. He has no political ambitions and is not concerned with any political party. He also calims not to be interested in any kind of publicity in the matter. The present petition has been filed substantially on the same grounds as the previous that the petitioners is a religious minded person, who professes the Hindu faith and that the order of the Election Commission dated by which the statues of elephants were directed to be covered for the entire election period to the U.P. legislative Assembly in U.P. is an infringement of his religious faith and violative of his fundamental right guranteed under Article 25 of the Consitution of India. The elephant is one of the seven divine forms of the godhead, and that it is impermissible to cover the statue for the entire electroal period. The statue could only be covered, if at all, when the God rests and that too after pronouncing some mantras, which have been annexed to the petition. He further submits that in paragraphs 42 and 43 of the Election Commission s order dated the Commission refused to grant the relief of withdrawing the party symbol Elephant of the BSP after observing that on the facts available to the Commission and record s adduced by the parties, the Commission is not in a position to gauge the impact of the above statues, and the extent of such impact, on the minds of the electrons. Hence it ought not to have issued the further direction in paragraph 44 of the order that ate the time of elections, the Commission would take appropriate steps to see that the statues of Ms mayawati and t he BSP s symbol elephant do not disturb the level playing field and give undue advantage to the BSP vis-a-vis other political parties, which was the basis of the impugned order of the Election Commission dated directing that the statues of the elephants and Ms Mayawati erected at public places which had been constructed on government expense, be coverd, during the current general elections to the Uttar Pradesh Legislative Assembly. It was also contended by the petition that if the elephant symbol deserved to be covered, then the cycles and hands which are symbols of other parites should also be covered. Shri Ravi Kant, Senior Advocated, learned Counsel for the Bahujan Samaj Party (for short the BSP ), whom we agreed to hear on behalf of the BSP (Which had prayed for being impleaded in the petitioner s earlier petition also which was dismissed as withdraw), as he claimed that the BSP and not the petitioner, would have cause to be aggrieved by the order of the Election Commission and that a frivolous petition had been filed by the petitioner, probably at the instance of some interested political group, so that on dismissal on the ground that by use of the symbol, the party tried to secure votes by pendering to religious sentiments, which is a corrupt practice according to section 123 (3) of the Representation of People s Act, 1951, the BSP would run the risk of losing its symbol on this account. He further submitted that the petitioner had still not established his credentials for filing this petition. His mere claim that he was a gradyate and a Hindu, who lives off the income from parental properties, does not provide him with sufficient credentials for filing this petition to epouse the public cause in which he has earlier shown little interest. We find some substance in Shri Ravi Kant s last contention that the petitioner has still not been able to prove his credentials for filing this writ petition, simply because he claims to be a graduate Hindu living off his parental properties. He could not show any locus standi for espousing this cause, nor could he show how and when he has espoused such cause in the past, and is not simply a publicity seeker. It is noteworthy that on the basis of the decisiion in State of Uttaranchal Vs. Balwant Singh Chauful and others, (2010) 3 SCC 402, of High Court introduced the amended sub-rule 3-A in Rule 1 of Chapter XXII which lays down that the petitioner filing a public interest litigation should precisely and specifically state in the affidavit his credentials, the public cause he is seeking to espouse, that he has no personal or private interest in the matter, there is no authoritative pronouncement by the Supreme Court and the High Courts on the questions raised and that the result of the public interest litigation would not lead to any undue gain to himself or any one associated with him or any undue loss to anybody or the State. Summing up the directions in paragraph 181 in Balwant Singh Chaufal s case (supra) it was specifically observed as follows in sub-paras 3, 5 and 7, which are material for giving a decision on the maintainability of the present petition: (3), The Courts should be prima facie satisfied by the credentials of the petitioner before entertaining a PIL. (5) The Courts should be fully satisfied that substantial public interest in involved before entertaining a PIL. (7) The Courts should before entertaining the PIL should ensure that the PIL is aimed at redressal of genuine public harm or public injury. The Court should also ensure that there is no personal gain, private motive or oblique motive behind filing the public interest litigation. If in exercise of its powers of its wide powers of superintendence for ensuring the purity of the electoral process under Article 324 and a level playing field for all candidates the Election Commission has issued the impugned order dated directing that the statues of Ms. Mayawati and the elephants erected on government expense be covered, it could not be said that the important criteria, in paragraph 181 (5) in Balwant Singh Chaufal s case (Supra) that The Courts should be fully satisfied that substantial public interest in involved before entertaining a PIL was at all disclosed by the petitioner for filing the writ petition. Rather as explained by the Election Commission in its impugned order dated the public interest would be better served in keepinh the statues covered during election times, than in keeping the same uncovered so that a level playing field for all contesting parties could be ensure. The petitioner s contention that his fundamental right to practice the Hindu faith is violated by the Election Commission s order dated is also bereft of any substance. Article 25 (1) of the Constitution on which 46

47 the petitioner bases his contention that his fundamental r ight of profess and practise his faith has been infringed, reads as follows: 25 (1) Subjest to public order, morality and health and to the other provisions of this part, all persons are equally entitled to freedom of conscience and the right freely to prefess, practise and propagate religion. A persual of Article 25 (1) shows that the provision itself permits putting restrictions on the rights of a person to profess or practice a religion, on the grounds of public order, morality, health or the other provisions of Part III of the Constitution. If in order to ensure that candidates from various political parties who were contesting the election get a level playing field the statues of the elephant and Ms. Mayawati built on public expense are directed to be covered by the Election Commission during election time, it could only be considered to be an act for furthering public order and morality, and this restriction would also be consistent with the right to equality mentioned in Part III, and thus the direction would fall within the acceptable limitations which may be imposed on the fundamental right to freedom of religion. In Acharya Maharajsgri Narendra Prasadji Anand Prasadji Maharaj Vs. State of Gujrat, AIR 1974 SC 2098, the Supreme Court has upheld the right of the state of bring out a law in exercise of powers under Article 31 (2), to compulsorily acquire property belonging to a religious institution for agrarian reform. If was held in the said case, that no rights in an organised society can be absolute. Enjoyment of one s rights must be also consistent with the enjoyment of rights also by others. Further it was held that A Particular fundamental right cannot exist in isolation in a water tight compartment. One fundamental right of a person may have to co-exist in harmony with the exercise of another fundamental right by others and also with reasonable and valid exercise of power by the State in the light of the Directive Principles in the interests of social welfare as a whole. The Court s duty is to strike a balance between competing claims of different interests. In Church of God (Full Gospel) in India v K.K.R.M.C. Welfare Association, AIR 2000 SC 2773 it was held that the use of loudspeakers by a particular community at the time of prayers is subject to the provisions of the Environment (Protection) Act, No religion preaches that prayers are to be performed through loudspeakers. Any such practice should not affect the rights to others. The provision of Article 25 is subject to the provisions of Article 19 (1) (a) of the Constitution, and on a true and proper construction of the provision of Article 25 (1), read with Article 19 (1) (a) of the Constitution, it cannot be said that a citizen should be coerced to hear any thing which he does not like or whice he does not require. Further more there is no meterial for indicating that the public or any particular section of the public were looking at the statues erected on the parks at Lucknow, Noida and Gautam Budh Nagar as religious symbols, which they were actually worshiping. Thus the erection of the statues by the State government there could be considered a purely secular activity. Hence any direction to cover the same by the Commission could not be said to be an interference with the essential or integral part of the faith or practies of the followers of the Hindu faith. In Smt. Indira Nehru Gandhi Vs. Raj Narain, AIR 1975 SC 2299, using of a cow and calf as an electroal symbol by the Congress (R) party was not held to be a corrupt practice within the meaning of section 123 (3) of the Representation of People Act, It was observed in the said decision as under: A. cow is not a religious symbol. The use of pictures of this excellent and useful animal is so frequently made today for commercial purpose other than religious that the representation of a cow and calf cannot except in some special and purely religious contexts be held to have a religious significance. A fortiori the said principal will apply to the present case as well, as we see images of elephants are widely prevalent. It is also commercially useful. The domesticated elephant is useful for uprooting trees or carrying logs of wood etc, or for help penetrating dense jungles by animal safaris. In earlier times the elephant was also put to warlike use during battles. Now its survival is being threatened by destruction of its habitats. We see images of the elephant in magazines depicting efforts to save the animal from extinction. If the cow was considered a commercially useful animal in Indira Nehru Gandhi Vs Raj Narain and of religious significance only in a purely religious context, this observation would apply with greater force in the case of the elephant which is normally not worshipped, except in some purely religious contexts, usually as Lord Ganesha, who has an Elephants s head (trunk) and a human body, and in normal course the images or statues of elephants do not have any religious significance. The proviso to Section 123 (3) of the Representation of people s Act, 1951 (which declares use of religion to appeal to voters to be a corrupt practice) and which was noted in Indira Nehru Gandhi Vs Raj Narain (Supra) itself makesan exception by providing that no symbol allotted under this Act to a candidate shall be deemed to be a religious symbol or a national symbol for the purposes of this clauses. The existence of this provision and its approval by the Apex Court in Indira Nehru Gandhi Vs Raj Narain s case should also allay Sri Ravi Kant s apprehensions that if the elephant symbol is given religious significance, the BSP could run the risk of losing the symbol on that account. So far as the petitioner s contention that in paragraphs 42 and 43 of the Election Commission s order dated as the Commission has observed that on the facts available to the Commission and records adduced by the parties, the Commission is not in a position to gauge the impact of the above statues and the extent of such impact, on the minds of the electors, hence the Election Commission ought not to have directed convering up the stafues of the elephants during elections, the said argument does not commend itself to us. The above quoted observation was made in the context of the Commission s refusal to accept the contention of the petitioners before it to withdraw the BSP s election symbol elephant. In the order the Commission had also noted that it was in the dark as the State government, inspite of a specific request to it had refused to furnish details regarding the number of statues and the expenses incurred on their construction. To us it appears that it may have been in the context of a long term perspective when the notification for 47

48 holding the election had not even been issued that the Commission had held that it was not in a position to adjudge the impact of the statueson the minds of the voter. The Commission has also given other good reasons for declining the request of the petitioners to withdraw the symbol given to the BSP by holding that even if the statues had been erected by public funds and not by the party, but as the State Government has the specific sanction of the State legislature, which has passed valid Appropriation Acts, the Commission could therefore not go into the question of expenditures having been incurred for installing the statues. Reliance was also placed on Ram Jawaya Kapoor Vs State of Punjab, [1955 (2) SCR 555and Bhim Singh Vs Union of India 2010 (5) SCC 538 that the actions of the government can only be assailed when the act is unconstitutional and not when only the expenditure is unwise. Hence it was observed that it was not for the Commission to go into the question whether the BSP has misused its position as the ruling party in getting the MS. Mayawati and elephant installed with public funds, during the non- election period. Further the Commission would be bound by any orders that the High Court or Supreme Court which were already seized of the matter would pass in the petitions before them. Another reason for declining the request for freezing symbol was that the BSP being a recognized national political party being a recognized national political party had been assigned the symbol elephant in all States other than Assam under the Elections symbols (reservation and Allotment) Order, 1968 (for short the Symbols order ). The grant and recognition of symbols is based on paragraphs 6 A, 6B and 16A of the Symbols order, that the party polls the required number of votes as required under the said paragraphs, and does not commit any breaches of the Model Code of Conduct laid down by the Election Commission. The Commission observed that it was nobody s case that the party s poll performance did not measure up to the required standards. It was also observed that there was no clear evidence before it that the BSP had violated the Model Code of conduct. Moreover the order observed that before withdrawal of a party s symbol. the Commission has to carefully weigh the implications which such withdrawal of symbol may have and cause confusion in the minds of millions of electors, apart from members, supporters and workers of the party, across the country, who identify the party with the symbol elephant on account of the actions of one of the State Governments. It was in this background that the Election Commission refused to freeze the party s symbol on a permanent basis by its order dated However the direction in exercise of powers under Article 324 to cover the statues of elephants and of the incumbent Chief Minister erected at government expense after the election notification has been issued and the dates for the elections announced has to be understood in the background that at that stage there is a compelling obligation on the Election Commission in ensure the conduct of free and fair elections and the purity of the electoral process and that no party gets any undue advantage over other contestants. It may be noted that in the impugned order of the Election Commission dated it was further observed that the petition filed before the Election Commission in the year 2009 praying inter alia for freezing of the symbol elephant allotted to the Bahujan Samaj Party, on the ground that the statues of elephants and the statues of Ms. Mayawati, put up at the expense of the government in various public places in different parts of the Stat jeopardized the concept of free and fair elections. The Commission further held that at the time of elections, it would, no doubt, take appropriate steps and measures to see that the statues of Ms Mayawati and the BSP s symbol elephant do not disturb the level playing field and give undue advantage to BSP vis-à-vis other political parties. It is noteworthy that neither the petitioner nor the BSP itself has chosen to specifically assail the part of the direction in its order dated which was to the following effect: However, at the time of elections, the Commission would no doubt, take appropriate steps and measures to see that the statues of Ms. Mayawati and BSP s symbol elephant do not disturb the level playing field and give undue advantage to BSP s symbol elephant do not disturb the level playing field and given undue advantage to BSP vis-à-vis other political parties. The direction to keep the statues of Ms Mayawati and the elephant s covered in the impugned order dated appears to be a direct consequence of the aforesaid observation in the earlier order dated Significantly, the order dated was challenged before the Supreme Court in Writ Petition (Civil) No. 266 of 2009 (Ravi Kant and another Vs. State of UP and others) but the Supreme Court had also not stayed that part of the order, which provided that the Commission would take appropriate steps and measures to see that the statues of Ms Mayawati and BSP s symbol elephant do not disturb the level playing field and given undue advantage to BSP vis-à-vis other political parties at the time of elections. The Supreme Court had observed in its order dated in Writ Petition (Civil) No. 266 of 2009 that the subject matter of the writ petition under Article 32 of the Constitution of India overlaps with the pending petition before the Allahabad High Court. The writ petition was directed to remain pending in the Supreme Court but it was made clear that pendency of the writ petition in the Supreme Court would not pre empt the Allahabad High Court from deciding the matter at the earliest. Learned counsel for the Election Commission points out that the High Court has also not stayed any part of the order dated passed by the Election Commission. It was further observed that at the time of general elections to the House of the People in 2009, the Commission had issued instructions dated to the effect that no photographs of the Prime Minister, Chief Minister, Ministers and other political functionaries should be displayed in any government / public building. The Commission had also clarified in its subsequent circular dated that the underlying intention of the instructions in the letter of the 28 th of March, 2009 was that the images of political functionaries, who have influence on the minds of the electors and many of whom are still active in public life should not be displayed in government buildings and premises as that would have the effect of disturbing the level playing field vis-à-vis the political functionaries of 48

49 other parties and candidates. It was made clear that while the photographs of Prime Minister, Chief Ministers, Minister and other political functionaries should not be displayed, the instructions did not apply with regard to the images of national leaders, poets and prominent historical personalities of the past, the President of India and the Governors. The Commission, after taking all the aspects of the matter into consideration and considering the need to ensure a level playing field for all political parties and candidates in the interest of free and fair elections, was directing that each and every statue of elephant and each and every statue of Ms Mayawati, erected in public places in the State of Uttar Pradesh at Government expense should be suitably covered so as to ensure that these statues do not influence the minds of the electors, by providing undue advantage to the ruling party and disturbing the level playing field during the current general elections to the Uttar Pradesh Legislative Assembly. The expense for covering the statues were to be borne by the local authorities under whose jurisdiction the various statues had been erected. The whole work of veiling the statues was to be completed by 5.00 PM on Another fallacious argument was raised by the petitioner to the effect that cycles should be banned or that hands or other objects be covered which constitute election symbols of one or the other party or contestant. It may be mentioned that the Election Commission assigns symbols of common objects to contestants so that the voters (especially where they are illiterate) have a clear idea of the party or candidate that they wish to support. What the Election Commission has sought to do by the impugned order is only to ensure that the other candidates have a level playing field and that there is no undue projection at public expense by creating greater than life size statues of political functionaries or symbols of the party. The Commission also observed that the issue as to whether the trunk of the elephant was upward or downward in the statues was not material for helping the voters decide which party they should vote for, if they were simply instructed to put their vote on the symbol elephant. We are therefore, of the view that the challenge to the maintainability of this petition at the instance of the petitioner which has also been supported by the BSP, has substance and the petition must be dismissed on this ground as well as on merits for the reasons stated hereinabove. However so far as the other contention of Shri Ravi Kant, Senior Advocate for the proposed intervenor, BSP that this petition has been filed in a mala fide manner and that the petitioner has been set up by rival political groups, we think that Shri Ravi Kant has not been able to substantiate this submission. While we think that the petitioner may have been misguided in filing this frivolous petition on a misunderstanding of the correct legal position, we see no reason to inter that the petition has been filed at the instance of some other political group for extraneous considerations. In view of what has been indicated herein above, we find no force in this petition. It is accordingly dismissed with costs. Order Dated mijksdr mpp U;k;ky; bykgkckn dh ih-vkbz-,y- 2630@12 vkwmzj fnukad dh izfr vusdtj ih& ;gfd] Hkkjr fuokzpu vk;ksx }kjk fnukad dks tkjh fd;s &^^The President/ General Secretary/ Chairperson/ Convener Of all recognized National and State Political Parties. Judgment dated of the Hon ble Supreme Court in C.A Nos. 37 of 1992 and C.A. No of 1995 (Abhiram Singh Vs C.D. Commachen & others) Seeking votes in the name of religion, caste etc. Your attention to the judgment of the Constitution Bench of seven Judges in C A No.s 37 of 1992 and C.A. No of 1995 (Abhiram Singh Vs C.D. Commachen & others) on the issue of use of religion, caste, etc in election campaign. By the majority judgment, the Apex Court has held that any appeal to vote or to refrain from voting for a candidate on the ground of religion, caste, race, community or language of the candidate, election agent, any person making the appeal with the consent of the candidate or on the ground of the religion, caste etc. of the electors would amount to corrupt practice. The relevant extracts from the judgment are quoted below for the information and reference of your party: The upshot of the above discussion clearly is that under the constitutional scheme mixing religion with State Power is not permissible while freedom to practice profess and propagate religion of one s choice is guaranteed. The State being secular in character will not identify itself with any one of the religions or religious denominations. This necessarily implies that religion will not play any role in the governance of the country which must at all times be secular in nature. The elections to the State legislature or to the Parliament or for that matter or any other body in the State is a secular exercise just as the functions of the elected representatives must be secular in both outlook and practice. Suffice it to say that the Constitutional ethos forbids mixing of religions or religious considerations with the secular functions of the State There is thus ample authority for the proposition that while interpreting a legislative provision, the Courts must remain alive to the constitutional provisions and ethos and that interpretations that are in tune with such provisions and ethos ought to be preferred over others. Applying that principle to the case at hand, an interpretation that will have the effect of removing the religion or religious considerations from the secular character of the State or state activity ought to be preferred over an interpretation which may allow such considerations to enter, effect or influence such activities. Electoral processes are doubtless secular activities of the State. Religion can have no place in such activities for religion is a matter personal to the individual with which neither the State nor any other individual has anything to do. The relationship between man and God and the means which humans adopt to connect with the almighty are matters of individual preferences and choices. The state is under an obligation to allow complete freedom for practicing, professing and propagating religious faith to which a citizen belongs in terms of Article 25 of the Constitution of India but the freedom so guaranteed has nothing to do with secular activities which the State undertakes. 49

50 The State can and indeed has in terms of Section 123 (3) forbidden interference of religions and religious beliefs with secular activity of elections to legislative bodies. To sum up [Emphasis supplied] An appeal in the name of religion, race, caste, community or language is impermissible under the Representation of People Act 1951 and would constitute a corrupt practice sufficient to annual the election in which such an appeal was made regardless whether the appeal was in the name of the candidate s religion or the religion of the election agent or that of the opponent or that of the voter s. The sum total of section 123 (3) even after amendment is that an appeal in the name of religion, race, caste, community or language is forbidden even when the appeal may not be in the name of the religion, race, caste, community or language of the candidate for whom it has been made. So interpreted religion, race, caste, community or language would not be allowed to play any role in the electoral process and should an appeal be made on any of those considerations the same would constitute a corrupt practice. With these few lines a answer the reference in terms of the order proposed by Lokur. J. On a consideration of the entire material placed before us by learned counsels. We record our conclusions as follows: (i) The provisions of sub-section (3) of Section 123 of the Representation of the People Act, 1951 are required to be read and appreciated in the context of simultaneous and contemporaneous amendments inserting sub-section (3A) in Section 123 of the Act and inserting Section 153 A in the (ii) Indian Penal Code. So read together, and for maintaining the Purity of the electoral process and not vitiating it, subsection (3) of Section 123 of the Representation of the People Act, 1951 must be given a broad and purposive interpretation thereby bringing within the sweep of a corrupt practice any appeal made to an elector by a candidate or his agent or by any other person with the consent of a candidate or his election agent to vote or refrain from voting for the furtherance of the prospects of the election of that candidate or for prejudicially affecting the election of any candidate on the ground of the religion, race, caste, community or language of (i) any candidate or (ii) his agent or (iii) any other person making the appeal with the consent of the candidate or (iv) the elector. 3. The Commission has instructed that all political parties shall take due not of the directions in the judgment for strict compliance. The political parties may also suitably brief and inform their lower formations and party cadres and all their candidates about the ruling of the Supreme Court and ask them to desist from any activities that would amount to soliciting votes in the name of religion, caste, etc. in any manner, in their own interest and in the interest of the party. Such appeals may also fall within the ambit of sub-paras (3) and (4) of Part I of the Model Code of conduct. mijksdr vkns k fnukad dks Hkkjr fuokzpu vk;ksx ds izhafliy lsøsvjh Jh ds-,q- foyýsm }kjk tkjh x;k tks vusdtj ih& ;gfd] ekuuh; lokszpp U;k;ky; }kjk Civil Appeal No. 37 of 1992 Abhiram Singh Vs C.D. Commachen (Dead) by Lrs & others With Civil Appeal No of 1995 Narayan Singh Vs Sunder Lal Patwa & ors esa ikfjr fu.kz; &^^The foundation for this reference relating to the interpretation of Section 123 (3) of the Representation of the People Act, 1951 to a Bench of Seven Judges has its origins in three decisions of this Court.In Abhiram Singh Vs C.D. Commachan the election in 1990 of Abhiram Singhto the No. 40, Santa Cruz Legislative Assembly Constituency for the Maharashtra State Assembly was successfully challenged by Commachen in the Bombay High Court. While hearing the appeal against the decision of the Bombay High Court, a Bench of three learned judges expressed the view that the content, scope and what constitutes a corrupt practice under sub- sections (3) or (3A) of section 123 of the Representation of the people Act, 1951 (for short, the act) needs to be clearly and authoritatively laid down to avoid a miscarriage of justice in interpreting corrupt practice. The Bench was of opinion that the appeal requires to be heard and decided by a larger Bench of five judges of this Court on three specific questions of law. In Narayan Singh Vs. Sunder Lal Patwa the election of Sunderlal Patwa from the Bhojpur constituency no. 245 in Madhya Pradesh to the Legislative Assembly in 1993 was under challenge on the ground of a corrupt practice in that the returned candidate had allegedly made a systematic appeal on the ground of religion in violation of Section 123 (3) of the Act. The election petition was dismissed. In appeal before this Court, the Constitution Bench noticed an anomalous situation arising out of an amendment to section 123 (3) of the Act in 1961inasmuch as it appeared that a corrupt practice for the ^^uksv&fuokzpu vk;ksx Hkkjr ljdkj }kjk lwpuk ds vf/kdkj ds rgr nh xbz lwpuk esa ist ua- 6 ls ist ua- 114 rd ds ist tkudkjh esa ugha fn;s x;s gs tcfd fuokzpu vk;ksx dh Mkyh xbz ist la[;k tks 267 tks ist ua- 5 ij gs,oa 268 ist ua- 115 ij gs bl izdkj vk;ksx }kjk 108 istksa dh udy izkfkhz dks iznku ugha dh xbz ftl dkj.k ls mijksdr nlrkostksa esa D;k fy[kk Fkk fy[kus esa vlefkz gwwa ks k tkudkjh iqu% izkjahk^^ 976 I would like to add one more, as the tenth, Once this Court has addressed an issue on a substantial question of law as to the structure of the constitution and has laid down the law, a request for revisit shall not be welcomed unless it is shown that the structural interpretation is palpably erroneous Jus tice A.K. Goel formulated the principle in the following terms Parameters for determining as to when earlier binding decisions ought to be reopened have been repeatedly laid down by this Court. The settled principle is that court should not, except when it is demonstrated beyond all reasonable doubts that its previous ruling given after due deliberation and full hearing was erroneous, revisit earlier decisions so that the law remains certain, 50

51 [Gannon Dunkerley and Co. V. State of Rajasthan, (1963) 1 SCC 364, paras 28 to 31] In exceptional circumstances or under new set of conditions in the light of new ideas, earlier view, if considered mistaken, can be reversed. While march of law continues and new systems can be developed whenever needed, it can be done only if earlier systems are considered unworkable. Applying these parameters no case has been made out to take a view at variance with the settled legal position that the expression his in section 123 (3) must mean the religion, race, community or language of the candidate in whose favour an appeal to cast a vote is made or that of another candidate against whom there is an appeal to refrain from voting on the ground of the religion, race, caste, community or language of that candidate. The Representation of the People Act, 1951 has undergone several parliamentary amendments. Parliament would be aware of the interpretation which has been placed by this Court on the provisions of Section 123 (3). Despite this, the provision has remained untouched though several others have undergone a change. In the meantime, elections have been held successfully, governments have changed and majorities have been altered in the house of Indian democracy. There is merit in ensuring a continuity of judicial precedent. The interpretation which has earlier been placed on Section 123 (3) is correct and certainly does not suffer from manifest error. Nor has it been productive of public mischief. No form of government is perfect. The actual unfolding of democrary and the working of a democratic constitution may suffer from imperfections. But these imperfections cannot be attended to by an exercise of judicial redrafting of a legislative provision. Hence, we hold that there is no necessity for this Court to take a view at variance with what has been laid down. The his in section 123 (3) does not refer to the religion, race, caste, community or language of the voter. His is to be read as referring to the religion, race, caste, community or language of the candidate in whose favour a vote is sought or that of another candidate against whom there is an appeal to refrain from voting. mijksdr vkns k ekuuh; lokszpp U;k;ky; }kjk fnukad dks ikfjr fu.kz; vusdtj ih& ;gfd] Hkkjr fuokzpu vk;ksx ds izhafliy lsøsvjh Jh ohjsunz dqekj }kjk fnukad dks ikfjr uksfvfqds ku &^^ No. 56/symbol/2016/PPS-II- In exercise of the power conferred by Article- 324 of the Constitution of India read with section 29 A of the Representation of the People Act, 1951, section 21 of the General Clauses Act, 1897, Rules 5 and 10 of the conduct of Elections Rules 1961 and all other powers enabling the Commission in this behalf the Election Commission of India hereby makes the following Order `to further amend the Election Symbols (Reservation and Allotment) Order, 1968 namely: -1. Short Title and Commencement -(i) This Order shall be called the Election Symbols (Reservation and Allotment) (Amendment) Order, (ii) It shall be deemed to have come into force with effect from 1 st January, 2014 and shall always be deemed to have been so effective. 2.Amendment of Paragraph- 6 C The existing Paragraph- 6 C of the Election symbols (Reservation and Allotment) Order, 1968 shall be substituted as follows : 6C- Conditions for continued recognition as a National or State Party:- (1) Notwithstanding anything in Paragraph 6 A and Paragraph 6 B, if a political party recognized as a State Party or National Party fails to fulfill the conditions of Paragraph 6A or, as the case may be, Paragraph 6 B, at the next general election to the House of the People or, as the case may be, to the Legislative Assembly of the State, following the general election to the House/ Assembly concerned on the basis of which it got recognition (hereinafter referred to as the next election ), it shall continue to be treated as recognized State Party or National Party, as the case may be. If a recognized political party continues to be treated as recognized National Party or State Party after the next election to the House of the People or, as the case may be, to the Legislative Assembly of the State under the provisions of sub- paragraph (1), the question whether it shall further continue to be so recognized after any subsequent general election to the House of the People or, as the case may be, to the Legislative Assembly of the State concerned, shall be subject to the fulfillment by the party of the conditions specified in Paragraph- 6A or 6B, as the case may be. tks vusdtj ih& ;gfd] Hkkjr fuokzpu vk;ksx }kjk ikfjr vkns k tks Mh-bZ-lh- ¼oh-Mh-½ }kjk mpp U;k;ky; vkns k fnukad ds ikyu esa fn;k x;k &^^Judgment dated of the Hon ble Delhi High Court in WP (C) No. 8363/2010 (Common Cause Vs Bahujan Samaj Party) in the matter of election symbol of Bahujan Samaj Party. The Bahujan Samaj Party (hereinafter referred to as the BSP ) is a recognized National Party under the provisions of Election Symbols (Reservation and Allotment) Order, 1968 (for short Symbols Order ) having the election symbol Elephant reserved for it in all States and Union Territories, except in the State of Assam. In June- July 2009 the Election Commission received three petitions raising the issue of statues of Elephant (reserved symbol of BSP) and Ms. Mayawati (President of that party and then Chief Minister of Uttar Pradesh) that were installed in various places, including public parks, in Uttar Pradesh at Government expense, and praying for freezing of the symbol Elephant as the reserved symbol of the BSP. These petitions were from (i) Shri Atul Kumar Singh, Secretary General of an organization named Rashitra Nirman, (ii) Shri Kamal Kany Jaswal, Director, Common Cause, and (iii) S/Sh. Ravi Kant and Sukumar, Advocates. In their petition dated 15 th July, 2009, S/Sh. Ravi Kant and Sukumar, Advocates, stated that the statues of elephant and Ms. Mayawati were installed in public places in Lucknow and Noida, with the money spent from the State Exchequer. They stated that the Lucknow Development Authority and Noida Authority provided this information to them in reply to the applications under the Right to Information Act. The reliefs claimed in the petitions before the Commission were as follows :- (a) The election symbol of BSP may be frozen and the 51

52 party granted another symbol; (b) Ms. Mayawati may be disqualified from contesting elections as her several statues will always remain to continue to create an unequal playing ground for her opponents during elections and thus violate the very concept of free and fair elections; (c) Since this jeopardizes the concept of free and fair elections, the Election Commission should call an all party meeting to arrive at consensus on the above subject. The Commission disposed of the complaints as not maintainable vide of order dated holding that the reliefs claimed could not be granted on the grounds mentioned in the petitions. The Commission, in the said order, inter alia, observed and held as follows : the main plank of defence of BSP is that the statues of elephant and leaders of BSP have been erected by the State Government and not by the party. In the erection of such states, the State Government has acted with the specific sanction of the State Legislature by passing valid Appropriation Acts. The BSP contends that the Commission cannot, therefore, go into the question of installation of these states, and the expenditure incurred thereon by the State Government. Reliance in support of the above contention has been placed on the decisions of the Hon ble Supreme Court in Ram Jawaya Kapoor Vs State of Punjab [1955 (2) SCR 225] and Bhim Singh Vs. Union of India, 2010 (5) SCC 538 to the effect that Judicial interference is permissible when the action of the government is unconstitutional and not when such action is not wise or that the extent of expenditure is not for the good of the State. We are of the view that all such questions must be debated and decided in the legislature and not in court. It was contended that when even the Apex Court of the land cannot go into the propriety or otherwise of any government action or expenditure, a fortiori, the Commission cannot sit in judgment over the decisions taken by the State Legislature and the executive act performed by the State Government in pursuance of such decisions of the State Legislature. The Commission sees quite a force in the above contention of the BSP and it cannot be lightly brushed aside. The question whether the BSP has misused its position as the ruling party in getting the statutes of Ms. Mayawati and elephant installed with public funds, during the non election period, is not for the Commission to go into. In view of taking into account the totality of the facts and circumstances available to the Commission, the reliefs prayed for by Shri Ravi Kant and others in their petitions under reference are not capable of being granted on the grounds urged and thus the said petitions are not maintainable. The Commission s order dated was challenged before the Delhi High Court in Writ Petition No. W.P. (C) 8363/2010 (common cause Vs. Bahujan Samaj Party). The High Court disposed of the petition vide judgment dated with the following directions :- I dispose of this petition with a request to ECI to : (A) Within a period of three months, consider issuing appropiate direction/ guideline within the meaning of Clause 16 A (b) of the Symbols Order preventing recognized political party in power from using public places and public funds for propagating its reserved symbol and/ or its leaders, so as to come in the way of conducting of free, fair and peaceful election and to safeguard the interest of the general public and the electorate in future; and (B) After issuing the said direction/ guideline, within a further period of three months therefrom, consider whether the actions already done by the respondent BSP and as complained of by the petitioner are in violation of the said guideline and if found so, to give opportunity to BSP to undo the same, so as to in future not obstruct the free and fair election and if the respondent BSP does not avail of the said opportunity, to initiate proceedings under paragraph 16 A of symbols order for withdrawal of recognition thereof. With respect to the first direction of the High Court as quoted above, instruction was issued by the commission on in a circular letter Additional to political F/A to the effect that no political party shall henceforth either use or allow the use of any public funds or public place or government machinery for carrying out any activity that would amount to advertisement for the party or propagating the election symbol allotted to the party. The second direction in the High Court s judgment was, as mentioned above, to consider whether the action on the part of respondent BSP as complained by the petitioner was in violation of guidelines issued by the Commission, and if found to be so, to give opportunity to BSP to undo the same, and if the BSP does not do so, to initiate proceedings under Para 16 A of Symbols Order for withdrawal of recognition. Before the Commission issued the abovementioned guidelines to political parties on , the judgment of the High Court was furnished to all recognized National and State Parties asking them to given their views regarding the guidelines to be issued in the matter. The BSP was among the few parties that furnished their views in this regard. The BSP conveyed their comments and views with regard to both the directions. The main contention of BSP in the views furnished by them was that the construction of the statues was an activity undertaken by the sovereign state Govt. And not by that party. At the relevant time, when the construction of statues was carried out, there was no direction of the Commission covering the subject or in any manner prohibiting such activity. The party also argued that any direction putting curbs on activities such as the subject matter of the complaints as per the present directions cannot be applied retrospectively. The Party further stated that if the Commission issues instructions in this regard, they will abide by the same in future. The operative part of the Commission s instructions in its circular letter dated is reproduced below :Accordingly, the Commission has directed that no political party shall henceforth either use or allow the use of any public funds or public pace or government machinery for carrying out any activity that would amount to advertisement for the party or propagating the election symbol allotted to the party..it is clarified that any violation of the above directions would be treated as violation of a lawful direction of the Commission within the meaning of paragraph 16 A of the Election Symbols (Reservation & Allotment) Order, The Commission has carefully considered the matter in its entirety. It is a fact that prior to the instructions issued on , there was no direction or instruction of the 52

53 Commission dealing with activities such as erecting structures depicting the election symbol undertaken by Government. The view hitherto, prior to the instruction of , was that the Commission would look into cases that come up during the period of elections when the Model Code of Conduct is in operation. Now, in the light of the abovementioned judgment of the High Court and the instructions of , was that the Commission would look into cases that come up during the period of elections when the Model Code of Conduct is in operation. Now, in the light of the abovementioned judgment of the High Court and the instructions issued by the Commission on , in pursuance of the judgment, any activity public funds or govt. resources for propagating election symbol of any party either by the party itself or by the Govt. could invite action against the party. In such case, the party which is the beneficiary of the activity cannot escape responsibility on the plea that the activity was the result of government decision. The govt. is formed by political parties and the ruling party or parties cannot misuse public funds or government resources for propagating their election symbol. However, as regards action against BSP on the ground of the construction of statutes of question, carried out in period, the Commission is of the considered view that the instructions now issued on cannot be enforced retrospectively so as to take action against the party. This order has the approval of the Election Commission. mijksdr vkns k vusdtj ih& ;gfd] bafm;u us kuy dkaxzsl ikvhz }kjk Hkkjr fuokzpu vk;ksx dks fnukad dks Hksts x;s i= esa gkfk dks fuokzpu izrhd iznku fd;s tkus ds laca/k esa fn;.k x;k vkosnu &^^Registrstion of Indian National Congress under Section 29A of the Representation of the people Act 1951 read with article 324 of the Constituting Rules 5 & 10 of the Conduct of Election Rules and paragraph 3 of the Election Symbols (Reservation and Allotment) Order Section 29A of the Representation of the people Act 1951, inserted by the Representation of the people(amendment) Act, 1988 (Central Act No.1 of 1989) lays down inter alia that a political party in existence at the commencement of the Representation of the People (Amendment) Act 1988 should make an application to the Election Commission for its registration as a political party and that every such application should contain particulars as in the said section. In this connection, various communications have been addressed to all political parties, recognised and registered, starting from 23 rd January 1989 and ending with the communication dated On the 15 th June 1989, a press communication has also been issued which specifically relterated that the political party should bear true faith and allegiance to the Constitution of India as per law established and the principles of socialism, seularism and democracy and would uphold the sovereignty, unity and integrity of India. It has also been made clear in the press note that no political party should be registered unless its memorandum or rules and regulations contains the abovementioned specific provision. The Commission is entitled to call for such other particulars as it may deem fit from the political party (vide sub-section (6) of section 29A). It is notified that the Indian National Congress has made an application under new provision seeking its registration. We urge that no action should be initiated on this application which, according to us, suffer from various basic infirmities and illegalities as to justify rejection of the same. The following reasons are given in support of this prayer. The Indian national Congress is governed by a written party constitution which lays down the procedure for its amendment. To the best of our knowledge. There has been no session of the congress forcarrying out the required amendment to the party constitutions envisaged under the law. Under the provision of the constitution and the election law, a duty is caast on you to examine every application of a political party to satisfy yourself whether the party constitution has been so amended as to bring it in conformity with the new provisions of law. If it is established that the amendment has been incorporated not following the procedure laid down in the party consitution, then you should hold that the party has not fulfilled the basic requirement as any such illegal incorporation should be treabed as false statement and non-est in the eye of law. Your satisfaction should not be subjective in nature but should be objective in the sense that the party constitution should have been amended by that organ which is empowered to do so after giving due notice and following procedure. In other words, the Indian National Congress, in the light of the statement made above, should be treated as the political party which did not comply with we would be in a position to substantiate our contentions herein and prove that the Indian National Congress has made a false application on a matter with serious implication of public nature and try to get away with registration of the Party on such false proof of the supporting document. We urge upon you to hear us on the same data on which the reprsentatives of the Indian National Congress is to be heard under Section 29A (7) of the Act. We would request you to favour us with a reply within ten days, to this letter even if it would amount to refusal to consider out prayer so that we may be able to seek suitable remedy in the appropriate forum. tks vusdtj ih& ;gfd] Hkkjr fuokzpu vk;ksx }kjk bafm;u us kuy dkaxzsl ikvhz dks fnukad dks ^^gkfk** fuokzpu fpug vkcafvr fd;k mdr vkacvu ysvj ftlds vuqlkj &^^Indian National Congress- Registration under section 29A of the Representation of the people Act, 1951 as a political party-matters regarding. In continuatin of the Commission s letter of even number dated 8 th September, 1989, on the above subject, I am directed to state that the Election Commission of India, after having considered your application, dated 14 th August, 1989, for registration of Indian National Congress as a political party and the documents produced in support of the statements/averments made/contained in the said application and submissions made by Sarvshri V.N. Gadgil, Gen. Secy., Gulam Nabi Azad, Gen. Secy., Madan Bhatia, M.P. S.C. Maheshwari, Senior Advocate and R.N. Mittal, Advocate before the commission on 15 th Sept in respect of the said application, has registered the 53

54 said Indian National Congress as a political party under section 29A of the Representation of the People Act, 1951 on and with effect from 20 th Sept As provided in sub-section (9) of section 29A of the Representation of the people Act, 1951, the party shall communicate to the Commission without delay any change in its name, head office, office-bearers, address or in any other material matters. In accordance with the provisions of sub-paragraph (2) of paragraph 7 of the Election Symbols (Reservation and Allotment) Order, 1968, as amended by the Election Symbols (Reservation and Allotment) (Second Amendment) order, 1989, dated 11 th August, 1989 (copy enclosed), the party will be treated as a National Party and the symbol HAND will be reserved for it. tks vusdtj ih& ;gfd] vkwy bafm;k dakxzsl desvh ¼vkbZ½ }kjk Hkkjr fuokzpu vk;ksx dks fnukad dks fn;k x;k i=&^^your letter No. 56/Re gn./89 dated 15 th June, 1989 regarding registration of political parties under new section 29A of the Representation of the People Act, V.N. Gadgil M.P. General Secretary }kjk fy[kk x;k i= tks vusdtj ih& ;gfd] vkwy bafm;k dakxzsl desvh }kjk Hkkjr fuokzpu vk;ksx dks fnukad dks fn;k x;k i=&^^the Commissikon s letterno. 56/Re gn./89 dated 15 th June, The application for registration of the Indian National Congress (I), as a political party, under Section 29 A of the representation of people act 1951 to gather with Annexures there to marked as A to D is enclosed and its being filled herewith. Kindly acknowledge the receipt. Central Secretary GulamNabi Azad }kjk fy[kk x;k i= tks vusdtj ih& ;gfd] jkds k ukfk bykgkckn }kjk fnukad dks Hkkjr fuokzpu vk;ksx dks Hksts x;s vius vkosnu esa fy[kk x;k fd &^^ Hkkjrh; jk Vªh; dkaxzsl ds pquko fpug dslfj;k] lqsn gjh ifg;ksa ds e/; esa iatk fpug ls jk Vªh; /ot dk vieku gksus ds laca/k esa mi;qzdr jk Vªh; jktuhfrd ny dkaxzsl dk pquko fpug tks dslfj;k jax] lqsn jax] gjs jax dh ifv~v;ksa ds chp iatk pquko fpug vafdr fd;k x;k iwjh rjg jk Vªh; /ot vieku fuokj.k vf/k dk myya?ku D;ksafd bl vf/k0 ds Li Vhdj.k 4 ¼p½ esa Li V myys[k gs fd Hkkjrh; jk Vªh; /ot ij fdlh izdkj dk vadu djuka Hkkjrh; jk Vªh; /ot ds vieku dh Js.kh esa vkrk blds vfrfjdr mlh vf/kesa Li Vhdj.k &2 esa vfhko;fdr Hkkjrh; jk Vªh; /ot dks ifjhkkf kr fd;k x;k Hkkjrh; jk Vªh; /ot ds varxzr Hkkjrh; jk Vªh; /ot ;k mlds fdlh Hkkx ij fdlh Hkh inkfkz ls cuk;k x;k Fkk fdlh inkfkz ij :fir fp=] jaxfp= ;k QksVks ;k vu; n` ;eku :i ls vkrk bl ifjhkk kk ls Li V gs fd Hkkjrh; jk Vªh; /ot ij iatk pquko fpug vafdr dj Hkkjrh; jk Vªh; dkaxzsl jk Vªh; ny dks mi;qzdr pquko fpug dks dsunzh; pquko vk;ksx us eku;rk iznku dh xbz tks iwjh rjg vos/kkfud gs rfkk jk Vªh; /ot vieku fuokj.k vf/k dh /kkjkvksa dks vkdf kzr dj jgk pquko vk;ksx {ks=h;ind c-l-ik- ds }kjk fufezr gkffk;ksa dks <dus ds fy;s ikwyhffku dh O;oLFkk fn;k fdarq Hkkjrh; jk Vªh; dkaxzsl ds pquko fpug ij /;ku ugha fn;k fd Hkkjrh; jk Vªh; /ot dh rhu ifv~v;ksa ds chp pø gvkdj iatk pquko fpug dks fdl vk/kkj ij eku;rk fn;k gs] bl pquko fpug dks ¼tks rhu ifv~v;ksa ij vk/kkfjr gks½ vfoyac fujlr djds fdlh vu; jax ds iv~vk ij iatk pquko fpug dks eku;rk fn;k tkuk pkfg;s tks fd os/k gks] mi;qzdr pquko fpug esa jk Vªh; /ot vieku fuokj.k vf/k dks vuns[kk vkijkf/kd d`r;ksa dks c<+kok fn;k tk jgk gs,oa mi;qzdr jktuhfrd ny ds jk Vªh; v/;{k ds fo:) fof/kd dk;zokgh vr;ar vko ;d gs vksj fopkj.kh; izkfkhz mi;qzdr vkijkf/kd d`r; ls {kqc?k gs vksj blfy;s fof/kd dk;z gsrq izkfkzuk i= ns jgk tks vusdtj ih& ;gfd] Vksiflag cks) }kjk fnukad dks Hkkjr fuokzpu vk;ksx] egkefge jk Vªifr] jkt;iky dks fn;s x;s vius vkosnu esa dkaxzsl ikvhz ds >ams o iats dks fujlr djus dh ekax dh xbza tks vusdtj ih& ;gfd] ksj eksgeen kkg jryke e-iz- }kjk Hkkjr fuokzpu vk;ksx dks fn;s x;s vius i= fnukad esa dgk x;k fd dkaxzsl ikvhz ds pquko fpug gkfk ds iats dks fujlr fd;k tk;sa D;ksafd gkfk eqflye /kez dh vklfkk dk izrhd gs tks vyh ds iats ds uke ls tx tkfgj ftlls eqflye /kezfyfec;ksa ds lkfk f[kyokm+ gks jgk tks vusdtj ih &216 & 208- ;gfd] Hkkjr fuokzpu vk;ksx }kjk v kksd ih- eqms,moksdsv fnukad dks Hksts x;s vius i= esa bafm;u us kuy dkaxzsl ikvhz ds gkfk dks fujlr djus gsarq Hkstk x;ka ftldk tckc izeksn dqekj kekz vamj lsaøsvjh }kjk fnukad dks Hksts x;s vius tckc esa fy[kk x;k fd&^^application regarding withdrawal of Election Symbol Hand of Indian Nation Congress regarding. Your letter dated on the subject cited and to forward a copy of letter No. KS/PS/EC/05/06/CR-230/SPL-1A, dated 31 st July, 2006 received from Govenment of Maharashtra over the issue raised by you in your representation. In view of the position explained by the Govt. of Maharashtra, the Commission finds no reason to withdraw the Symbol Hand from the Indian National Congress. tks vusdtj ih &217 & 209 ;gfd],d i= NRÙkhlx<+ ls fnukad dks Hkkjr fuokzpu vk;ksx dks Hkstk x;ka ftlesa gkfk ds iats dks fujlr djus ds laca/k esa fy[kk x;ka tks vusdtj ih& ;gfd] fnukad dks,d Hkkjrh; ukxfjd }kjk Hkkjr fuokzpu vk;ksx ds eq[; fuokzpu vk;qdr Jh dqjs kh th dks Hkstk x;ka ftlessa gkfk ds iats ij jksd yxk;s tkus ds laca/k esa fy[kk x;ka tks vusdtj ih& ;gfd] Nh:yky dqegkj chdkusj ls fnukad dks Hkkjr fuokzpu vk;ksx dks Hksts x;s vius i= esa fy[kk fd&^^ernkrk ds vax ¼ kjhj½ lacaf/kr pquko fpug vksj pquko izpkj lafgrk ds rgr ernku dsunz ls 100 ehvj dh nwjh ij j[ks tkus dk dfku djuka Qkby la 56@30@2011 ihih,l&ii/79 fnukad 04 vizsy 2012 izkfir rkjh[k %30 mijkaga vk;ksx }kjk Hksts x;s i= ls lger ugha gs D;ksafd â;wej ckwmh ikv~zl vfkkzr~ pquko 54

55 fpug gkfk dks ernku ds fnu ernku dsunz ls pquko izlkj lafgr ds izfr ks/kkred fu;eksa ds rgr fu/kkzfjr nwjh 100 ehvj ij dsls tkrk gs jksdk tk ldrk gs ckcr~ dksbz myys[k dfku n`f V xksj@n`f V xkspj@ ibu esa ugha vkosnd la- Fk- ds bl dfku myys[k fd fur; izfrfnu mi;ksx esa vkus okys pquko fpug ^^NÙk ia[kk] LVwy] Vscy] dqlhz] L;kgh dh nokr,oa?km+h] isu] di] r rjh] vksj pkch vkfn dks ^^gweu ckwmh ikvz** ^^bysd ku flecy** ds :i esa,d tslk vfkkzr~ olrq futhzo rfkk ltho ernkrk ds vax pquko fpug dks leku :i nsus ls Hkh lger ugha en~nsutj vkosnu ekuuh; iz;ksx ds le{k fueu fcanq dfku j[krs gq;sa iqu% foos- gsrq fuosnu djrk mijksdr futhzo olrq pquko fpug flecy dqlhz Vscy] ia[kk] L;kgh dh nokr] vkfn dks ernkrk pquko ds fnu ernku dsunz ds 100 ehvj nwjh ds vanj ernkrkvksa dks fn[kkrs gqos ys tk ldrk ftl rjg gweu ckwmh ikvz flecy dks ys tkrk pwafd of.kzr flecy gkfk ij fuokzpu vk;ksx ds ¼pquko izpkj lafgrk ds½ izfr ks/kkred fu;e gweu ckwmh ikvz flecy ij ykxw ugha fd;s tk ldrs D;ksafd gweu ckwmh dks ¼dqN vf/kdkj½ ckwmh ikvz ls lacaf/kr uslfxzd vf/kdkj tu ls gh izkir gksrs mu izkf/kdkjksa ij fuokzpu iz;ksx }kjk cuk;sa tsls fu;e pquko izpkj lafgrk izfr ks/kkred fu;e ykxw djuk fdlh Hkh rjg ls lahko ugha gs vksj ugha ykxw gksus@fd;s tkus dh vis{kk gh dh tk ldrh ekuuh; fuokzpu vk;ksx dh lq kir kfdr vf/kdkj ds rgr gky gh ds fo/kku lhkk pqukoksa esa,d ikvhz dsa pquko fpug dks izfr ks/kkred fu;eksa ds rgr lq kqir dj fn;k x;k tkdj lekpkj i=ksa ds ek/;e ls o nwjn kzu ij fhkuu&fhkuu psuyl ek/;e ls tutu rd igqapk;k x;k Fkk ls Li V pquko izpkj lafgrk o pquko izpkj lafgrk ds izfr ks/kkred fu;eksa rfkk iz;ksx dk lq kqir vf/kdkj kfdr mrrjnkf;ro vksj pquko fpugksa ds LFkkf;Ro@tIr fd;s tkus laca/kh izkf/kdkj dh tkudkjh dk izdj.k gqvk en~nsutj&pwafd pquko fpug ^^gkfk** dks ernku ds fnu ernku dsunz ls 100 ehvj nwj j[kus ds fy;s ernkrk ds kjhj ls laf/k fopnsn ugha fd;k tk ldrka vfkkzr~ ^^gkfk** ij fdlh Hkh rjg dk fu;e ykxw gh ugha fd;k tk ldrk en~nsutj freezing of Election Symbol Hand ij iqu% foospu eafku gsrq fuosnu fd;k tkrk tir gs bl vksj rf;kred n`f Vdks.k ls vksj Qjek;k tkosxka tks fnukad vusdtj ih& ;gfd] Hks:yky }kjk jk Vªh; bafm;u us kuy dkaxzsl ikvhz ds iatk o >ams ds laca/k esa Hkstk x;k i= fnukad tks vusdtj ih& ;gfd] fnukad dks ekuuh; mpp U;k;ky; [k.mihb ds le{k Jherh euh kk kekz }kjk tufgr ;kfpdk Øekad 6099@2013 izlrqr dh ftlesa ;wfu;u vkwq bafm;k lfpo lwpuk,oa izlkj.k ea=ky; Hkkjr ljdkj] insu lfpo Hkkjr fuokzpu vk;ksx] v/;{k fof k V igpku izkf/kdj.k ;kstuk vk;ksx] eq[; fuokzpu vf/kdkjh Hkksiky] v/;{k bafm;u us kuy dkaxzsl ikvhz] vjfoan dstjhoky jk Vªh; la;kstd vke vkneh ikvhz ds fo:) izlrqr dh xbza ftlesa izfr;kfpdkdrkzx.kksa }kjk dgk x;k fd izfr;kfpdkdrkzx.kksa }kjk jktuhfrd LokFkZ ds fy;s jk Vªh; /ot dh foøhr isafvx cukdj mi;ksx djus,oa ekuo kjhj dk lcls vf/kd egroiw.kz,oa laosnu khy gkfk dk iatk gksrk ftls pquko fpug ds :i esa vkcafvr dj vkn kz pquko lafgrk dk [kqyk myya?ku dj 70 djksm+ ernkrkvksa ds lafo/kkfud yksdrkaf=d,oa uslfxzd U;k;] fof/k ds le{k lekurk Hkkjrh; lafo/kku ds vuqpnsn 14 dk guu fd;k tk jgk izr;sd Hkkjrh; ukxfjd dk ;g drzo; gs fd og jk Vªh; /ot dk leeku djsaa Hkkjrh; lafo/kku ds vuqpnsn 14 ds Hkkx prqzfk&,,oa jk Vªh; xksjo vieku fuokj.k vf/kfu;e 1971 dh /kkjk 2 o vuqpnsn 14 dk guu lfu;ksftr o lqlaxfbr gksdj ;kstukc) :i ls Hkkjrh; ukxfjdksa ds lafo/kkfud vf/kdkj ¼fu i{k erkf/kdkj½ dk guu dj 70 djksm+ ernkrkvksa ds lkfk fuokzpu vk;ksx dks iznùk vf/kdkj o kfdr;ksa dk ;qfdr;qdr lafo/kkfud o fof/kd vf/kdkjksa ds uke ij ernkrkvksa ds lkfk euekuk o HksnHkkoiw.kZ O;ogkj dj jktuhfrd LokFkZ gsrq ernkrkvksa dh lafo/kkfud vf/kdkj dk kks k.k dj yksdrkaf=d izfø;k dks lq/kkjus ds uke ij nq:i;ksx dj i{kikriw.kz O;ogkj dj iznùk lafo/kkfud nkf;roksa dh vogsyuk dj vuqpnsn 14 dh xyr O;k[;k dj ernkrkvksa ds lafo/kkfud vf/kdkjksa ls f[kyokm+ fd;k tk jgk ftl laca/k esa ;kfpdkdrkz }kjk ekuuh; U;k;ky; ds le{k mijksdr tufgr ;kfpdk izlrqr dh xbz FkhA vkn kz pquko lafgrk ds vuqlkj ernku dsunz ls 100 ehvj dh ifjf/k esa fdlh Hkh O;fDr }kjk fuokzpu izrhd ys tkuk izfrcaf/kr gksrk gs ijarq gkfk O;fDr ds kjhj dk lcls egroiw.kz o vfrlaosnu khy vax izr;sd ernkrk ernku dsunz esa nks gkfk ds iats ysdj izos k djrk gs ogka yach&yach ykbusa yxh gksrh gs ftlesa le; yxrk dkaxzsl ikvhz ds ernkrk o ernku dsunz esa miflfkr jgrs gs vksj og gkfk ds iats dks fgykdj ladsr ds :i esa mi;ksx djrs ftlls yksduhfr o yksdrkaf=d izfø;k dks nwf kr fd;k tkrk gs tks ernkrk dh vf/kdkj fof/k ds le{k lekurk lafo/kku ds vuqpnsn 14 dk guu fnukad dks Hkkjr fuokzpu vk;ksx }kjk mrrjizns k fo/kkulhkk fuokzpu ds le; i= tkjh dj fnukad rd leiw.kz mrrjizns k esa gkfkh dh ewfrz;ksa dks <d fn;k x;k ;g dk;zokgh eq[; pquko vk;qdr }kjk fof/k ds le{k lekurk ds vf/kdkj ds rgr vke ernkrk ds vf/kdkjksa dks n`f Vxr j[krs gq;s dh xbz FkhA ftlesa ikdksz esa] pksjkgksa ij tks ernku dsunz ls,d fdyksehvj ls 25 fdyksehvj rd dh nwjh ij FksA lhkh gkfkh dh izfrekvksa dks <d fn;k x;ka ijarq fuokzpu vk;ksx }kjk gkfk dk iatk tks kjhj dk vr;ar egroiw.kz vax gs mls fuokzpu izrhd ds :i esa o kz 1989 esa vkcafvr dj Hkkjrh; lafo/kku ds vuqpnsn 14 dk [kqyk myya?ku fd;k ;gfd] Hkkjrh; jk Vªh; /ot frjaxk Hkkjr ds 125 djksm+ turk dh LokfHkeku o leeku izhkqrr],drk vksj v[k.mrk dk izrhd gs tks gesa gekjs iwoztksa ds cfynku dk izrhd gs] ds izfr viekutud dr;ksa dks jksdus o jktuhfrd LokFkZ gsrq tkucw>dj jk Vªh; /ot dks eap ij ltkov ds :i esa ihns fp=dkjh djus ds fo:) ;kfpdk izlrqr dh xbz FkhA ftlesa jk Vªh; /ot ds jktuhfrd mi;ksx ij jksd yxkbz tkus,oa Hkkjr fuokzpu vk;ksx ds }kjk o kz 1989 esa vkcafvr iats dks fujlr dj ekg uacoj 2013 esa e-iz- lfgr ikap jkt;ksa esa gksus okys 55

56 fo/kkulhkk pquko esa bafm;u us kuy dkaxzsl ikvhz dks u;k fuokzpu izrhd vkacfvr fd;s tkus ds laca/k esa mijksdr tufgr ;kfpdk izlrqr dh xbz FkhA ftlesa fnukad dks ekuuh; U;k;ewfrZ Jh,l-ds- xakxys,oa,e-dseqn~xy lkgc dh [k.mihb }kjk fu.kz; fnukad ds }kjk ;kfpdkdrkz Jherh euh kk kekz ij dk vfkznam yxkrs gq;s mdr ;kfpdk fujlr dh xbza ftlesa fu.kz; ikfjr fd;k x;k fd&^^this PIL has been filled by the petitioner for the relief to the effect that the respondent No. 5 and 6 be directed not be misuse the National Flag. The petitioner further prayed a relief that respondent No. 2 be directed to cancel the symbol alloted to Indian National Congrss and further prayed a relief that all the Adhar Cards issued by the Central Government be cancelled and misuse of National Flag be stopped. After perusal of the reliefs prayed by the petitioner in this petition, in our opinion, no such relief can be granted to the petitioner by this Court. After perusal of the Writ Petition, in our opinion, Writ petition filed by the petitioner is misconceived and it has been filed with oblique motive. It is vexatious litigation. Hence, Writ Petition is dismissed with costs of Rs. 5,000/- (Five Thousand Rupees Only). mijksdr ;kfpdk,oa vkns k dh izfr vusdtj ih& ;gfd] Jherh euh kk kekz }kjk fnukad dks Hksts x;s vius vkosnu eq[; fuokzpu vk;ksx Hkkjr fuokzpu vk;ksx lfpo Hkkjr fuokzpu vk;kx funsz kd ¼fof/k rfkk insu izeq[k lfpo½ Hkkjr fuokzpu vk;ksx,oa vk;qdr jkt; fuokzpu vk;ksx Hkksiky dks bafm;u us kuy dkaxzsl ikvhz }kjk ikvhz /ot,oa pquko fpug gkfk ds iats ij ekg ucaoj 2013 esa e-iz- lfgr 5 jkt;ksa ds fo/kkulhkk pquko dh vf/klwpuk ds iwoz jksd yxkbz tkus ckcr~a lanhkz & Jh izeksn dqekj kekz vamj lsøsvjh Hkkjr fuokzpu vk;ksx ds i= Øekad F. No. 56/38/2011-PPS fnukad ds vkosnu dk tckc fn;k x;ka ftlesa dgk x;k fd Xokfy;j flfkr inek fo ky; esa cuh gqbz gkfkh dh izfrek ij gj pquko esa dim+s ls <d fn;k tkrk tcfd gkfk dk iatk gj ernkrk ds lkfk ernku dsunz esa jgrk gs tks Hkkjrh; lafo/kku ds vuqpnsn 14 dk myya?ku fpug dk mìs ; ^^izrhd** gksrk gs] gkfk dk iatk izrhd ugh tcfd fuokzpu vk;ksx }kjk Hkkjrh; lafo/kku ds vuqpnsn 14 ds rgr fnukad dks mrrj izns k fo/kkulhkk esa lkoztfud LFkyksa] pksjkgksa] ikdksz ij gkfkh dh ewfrz;ksa dks <dus ds vkns k fn;s x;s] ds laca/k esa vkosnu fnukad ,oa dks fn;k x;ka tks vusdtj ih& ;gfd] eq[; fuokzpu inkf/kdkjh e-iz- e/;izns k fuokzpu lnu Hkksiky }kjk fnukad dks fn;s x;s vkosnu ds tckc gsrq lfpo Hkkjr fuokzpu vk;ksx dks Hkstk x;k i= fnukad tks vusdtj ih& ;gfd] :gh [kku Hkksiky }kjk fnukad dks bafm;u us kuy dkaxzsl ikvhz ds ysx,oa fuokzpu fpug ds laca/k esa Hkkjr fuokzpu vk;ksx dks Hkstk x;k vkosnu tks vusdtj ih& ;gfd] fxjh k kekz Xokfy;j }kjk bafm;u us kuy dkaxzsl ikvhz ds ysx ds laca/k esa x`gea=ky; Hkkjr ljdkj dks fn;k x;k i= fnukad dk tckc ea=ky; }kjk fnukad dks fn;k x;k tks vusdtj ih& ;gfd] fxjh k kekz Xokfy;j }kjk bafm;u us kuy dkaxzsl ikvhz ds ysx ds laca/k esa x`gea=ky; Hkkjr ljdkj dks fn;k x;k i= fnukad dk tckc ea=ky; }kjk fnukad dks fn;k x;k fd&^^the matter related to use of tri-color flag by various political parties is sub-judice in the Hon ble Supreme Court of India. tks vusdtj ih& ;gfd] fxjh k kekz }kjk fnukad dks vk/kkj dkmz ij dslfj;k o gjs jax dh cukbz xbz ekdzj dh ykbuksa ds laca/k esa vkosnu fn;k x;k fd mijksdr vk/kkj dkmksz dks ernku dsunz esa ys tkus ls jksdk tk;s D;kasfd mijksdr foøhr frjaxsa dh ykbuksa ls dkaxzsl ikvhz dk izpkj gksrk blfy;s mdr foøhr vk/kkj dkmksz dks ernku dsunz esa ys tkus ls jksdk tk;sa tks vusdtj ih& ;gfd] fxjh k kekz }kjk fnukad dks bafm;u us kuy dkaxzsl ikvhz ds fuokzpu fpug gkfk ds }kjk vuqpnsn 14 dk guu fd;s tkus ls iatk,oa ikvhz /ot dks fujlr djus ckcr~ fn;s x;s vkosnu Jh ujsunz eksnh iz/kkuea=h eq[; fuokzpu vk;qdr] Hkkjr fuokzpu vk;qdr] vfer kkg v/;{k ch-ts-ih] v/;{k bafm;u us kuy dkaxzsl ikvhz dks fn;s x;s vkosnu vusdtj ih& ;gfd] lwpuk ds vf/kdkj ds rgr Hkkjr fuokzpu vk;ksx ls pkgh xbz tkudkjh fnukad ds vuqlkj & Hkkjr fuokzpu vk;ksx }kjk ^^gkfk** fuokzpu izrhd bl laca/k esa vk;ksx eas dksbz lwpuk miyc/k ugha vkjf{kr djus ls iwoz vu; ikfvz;ksa ls gkfk ds laca/k esa ekaxh pkgh xbz nkos vkifrr;ksa ftlls fuokzpu fpug vkacvu dk fojks/k fd;k x;k] dh izekf.kr izfrfyfia vkjf{kr fuokzpu izrhd ^^gkfk**ds LFkku ij bafm;u us kuy dkaxzsl ikvhz }kjk ^gkfk* dk iatk** fuokzpu fpug dk mi;ksx ftl vkns k o funsz k ds rgr fd;k tk jgk gs] mijksdr vkns k dh izekf.kr izfrfyfia bafm;u us kuy dkaxzsl ikvhz }kjk o kz 1981 ls vkt rd fdl fuokzpu izrhd ij fuokzpu ym+k x;k] mijksdrk fuokzpu fpug dh izekf.kr izfrfyfia 56@vkj@6@89 rkjh[k 23 flrecj] 1989 esa bafm;u us kuy dkaxzsl ikvhz dks fuokzpu izrhd 56 bl laca/k esa vk;ksx esa dksbz lwpuk miyc/k ugha izrhd ^^gkfk** vkcafvr fd;k x;ka bl laca/k esa vk;ksx esa dksbz lwpuk miyc/k ugha

57 ^^gkfk dk iatk** fy[kk tk jgk gs] mdr gkfk dk iatk dkaxzsl ikvhz dks dc vkcafvr fd;k x;k mijksdr gkfk ds iats dk vkcavu i= dh izekf.kr izfrfyfia mijksdr vkosnu lwpuk ds vf/kdkj ds rgr Hkstk x;k tks vusdtj ih& ;gfd] fxjh k kekz }kjk fnukad dks lwpuk ds vf/kdkj ds rgr ftyk fuokzpu vf/kdkjh kkgtgk iqj dks Hksth xbz tkudkjh & o kz 2012 ls 2017 rd ftyk fuokzpu vf/kdkjh] kkgtgk oqk dks gkfk dk iatk fujlr fd;s tkus gsrq dksbz vkosnu izkir ugha gqvka fofnr gks fd pquko fpug vkcafvr djus rfkk mldks fujlr djus vkfn dh dk;zokgh ftyk fuokzpu vf/kdkjh ds Lrj ls ugha gksrh ** mijksdr i= dk tckc fnukad vusdtj ih& ;gfd] jktuhfrd LokFkZ ds fy;s jk Vªh; /ot dk foøhr :i cukdj insz ds :i esa cukbz xbz isafvx tks lekpkj i= fnukad lekpkj i=ksa dh izfr vusdtj ih& ;gfd] Hkkjr fuokzpu vk;ksx ds vamj lsøsvjh Jh vkuan dqekj ikbd }kjk fnukad dks fy[ks x;s i= &^^The president/general Secretary of all the Recognized political parties. Hon ble Delhi High Court Order in the matter of W.P. (C) No. 8363/2010 Common Cause Vs Bahujan Smaj Party-regarding. Order dated of the Hon ble Delhi High Court in W.P. (C) No. 8363/2010-Common Cause Vs Bahujan Samaj Party. A copy of the Order is enclosed herewith for ready reference. The Hon ble High Court has directed the Commission to issue appropriate direction/guideline within the meaning of Clause 16A (b) of the Election Symbols (Reservation & Allotment) Order, 1968 for preventing recognized political party in power from misusing public places and public funds for propagating its reserved symbol and/or its leaders, so as to enable free, fair and peaceful elections and to safeguard the interests of the general public and electorate in future. In this regard you are requested to submit the suggestions/views of your party in this matter as regard how best to put in place such a framework, latests by tks vusdtj ih& ;gfd] bafm;u us kuy dkaxzsl ikvhz ds tuknzu f}osnh tujy lsøsvjh 24 vdcj jksm+ ubz fnyyh }kjk fnukad dks Hkkjr fuokzpu vk;ksx dks Hksts x;s vius i= esa fy[kk fd &^^Letter dated asking for suggestions for framing guidelines for preventing misuse of public places and public funds for propagation of reserved symbols and its leaders. The Indian National Congress holds the firm positiion that no political party in power should be permisster to use public places or public funds to propagate its party symbols. Such a practice distrubs the level playing field which is essential in a democratic process. Any propagation of its electoral symbol by a political party has to be form private funds of such party and any hoardings or banners erected or displayed should be with requisite permission of the Municipal authorities after payment of notified propagation. Once Code of Conduct has come into place, any such propagation has to be in strict conformity with the elaborate guidelines and instructions issued by Election Commission of India. Any surrogate or proxy advertising of the symbol of the party must be prohibited by the guidelines wherever the reserved symbols is directly or overtly used in a predominat manner connected with legitimate governmental activities (e.g. use of only an elephant statue Symbol in a government/public park.) However, where use of such symbol is incidental, peripheral, occasional or wholly subsidiary, along with several other symbol plus intrinsically relevant and connected to the governmental public activity, it should be allowed. No public/governmental funds can obviously be allowed to propagate a political party or its ambitions or activities. Regarding propagatiion of leaders, we may point out that statues of national icons, consititutional authorities like former Prime Ministers, Presidents or other celebrated freedom fighters, national icons and historical figures, who admittedly have become part of the country s political party, be treated as surrogate promotion/propagation of a political party nor misuse of public funds. Moreover, the Election Commission is well equipped to apply the test of exalted national icons versus transient figures. Government facilities and public spaces must exhibit a neutrality and constitute an unbiased space for the community at large, unconnected with the vicissitudes of any political party which may temporarily be the ruling dispensation. We would request the Election Commission to prepare a set of draft guidelines based on suggestion received from different quarters and circulate the same for opinion of all political parties so that a consensus may be evolved for a more democratic process. We will await the draft guidelines from Election Commission and will give comments and suggestions on receipt of the draft. We fully support the endeavor of the Election Commission to undertake the formulation of guidelines for strengthening our democratic process and would be glad to render any further cooperation that may be required for this purpose. mijksdr i= bafm;u us kuy dkaxzsl ikvhz }kjk fnukad dks Hkkjr fuokzpu vk;ksx dks Hkstk x;k tks vusdtj ih& ;gfd] bafm;u us kuy dkaxzsl ikvhz ds Majeed Memon us kuy lsøsvjh ubz fnyyh }kjk fnukad dks Hkkjr fuokzpu vk;ksx dks Hksts x;s vius i= esa fy[kk fd &^^Letter No. 56/4/2015/LET/FUNC/PP/PPS-II/2016 dated On behalf of Nationalist Congress Party the following suggestions/views in respect of Dehli High Court Order in W.P. no. 8363/2010 Common Cause Vs. Bahujan Samaj Party are being placed on your record. In order to hold free and fair elections throught the country by the Election Commission of India, various stern measures are to be adopted to eliminate abuse of power and mal-practises. In this context, the afore-said judgement of the Hon ble Delhi High Court is enlightening and if implemented in letter and spirit, the same would contribute a great deal to achieve the said object. It has been often observed that the ruling 57

58 party at the Center or in states triest to take advantage of its power both in terms of use of funds and misuse of state machinery. Public places and public funds for election propaganda are exploited by the ruling party and as rightly suggested by the Hon ble High Court the same needs to be controlled and eliminated. The local Election Commission Office should activate local Municipal Authority and Police Authority to guard against such abuse and register cases and report to the local Election Officer. This can only be feasible by coordinated efforts by all these agencies. Furthermore, election observers can play an important role. It will help a great deal if election commission issues suitable circulars to every local body as aforesaid to ensure implementation of the mandate of law in the aforesaid judgement in letter and spirit. Those found responsible for violating the said rules should be sternly penalized. Our party is prepared to extend all possible cooperation and assistance in this regard. mijksdr i= bafm;u us kuy dkaxzsl ikvhz }kjk fnukad dks Hkkjr fuokzpu vk;ksx dks Hkstk x;k tks vusdtj ih& ;gfd] Hkkjrh; kkafr Økafr ikvhz ds jk Vªh; }kjk fnukad dks Hkkjr fuokzpu vk;ksx dks Hksts x;s vius i= esa fy[kk fd&^^ fdlh Hkh ns k dk viuk izhkqro gksrk gs tks ns k izseh,oa jk Vªoknh gs os fdlh Hkh rjg vius ns k dh xfjek ij vk p ugha vkus nsuk pkgrs FkksM+k ls LokFkZ dh cfynkuh dqn Hkh ugha gs viuk lc dqn U;kSNkokj dj viuh dqckzuh nsdj ns k ds izhkqro dks dk;e j[kuk viuk xksjo dk;e j[kuk jk Vª /kez ekurs Hkkjrh; jk Vªh; dkaxzsl dk >.Mk Hkkjrh; >.Ms ds leku dslfj;k] lqsn,oa gjh jax ls Øe k% cuk;k x;k ;g jk Vª ds lkfk Hkn~nk etkd gs Hkkjrh; dkaxzsl dks viuh >.Ms dh iv~vh dks uhps Åij dj cnyuk pkfg;sa Hkkjrh; pquko vk;ksx dks vf/kdkj gs fd bl ekeys dk xahkhjrk iwozd fopkj dj cnyok;saa orzeku ;k Hkfo ; esa jk Vªh; /ot ds chp esa viuk pquko fu kku yxk;sa vksj jktuhfrd ikvhz cuk;sa,slk ugha gksuk pkfg;sa ns k ds fy;s cfynku nsus okys pys x;sa mlds mijkar fdlh us xahkhjrkiwozd fopkj ugha fd;k fd jk Vª dk?kksj vieku gks ldrk gs tsls dksbz ikvhz jk Vªh; /ot ds chp esa pquko fpug ds uke ij x/kk ;k dksbz vksj ¼vHknz fu kku cuk;sa½ rks ns k dk fdruk cm+k vieku gksxka vius xys esa jk Vªh; /ot dk xenk Mky fy;k tk;s rks yksx dkaxzsl le>dj Hkn~nk etkd djrs fd rqegkjh dkaxzsl D;k dj jgh esa fouezrk iwozd izkfkzuk djrk gw fd vki xahkhjrk iwozd Hkkjr dh ihm+k dks le>s vksj vki vkreeafku dj fu.kz; nsaa mijksdr i= Hkkjrh; kkafr Økafr ikvhz }kjk fnukad dks Hkkjr fuokzpu vk;ksx dks Hkstk x;k tks vusdtj ih& ;gfd] lerk vkanksyu lfefr ubz fnyyh }kjk eq[; fuokzpu vk;qdr dks fy[kk x;k i= fnukad ds vuqlkj &^^ernkrkvksa ls Ny] div] /kks[kk,oa nqjkpj.k djus okyh ikvhz Hkkjrh; jk Vªh; dkaxzsl dk pquko fpug tcr djus dh ;kfpdka mijksdr vkosnu tks vusdtj ih& ;gfd] Hkkjr fuokzpu vk;ksx }kjk fnukad dks izkir,d vkosnu esa fy[kk x;k fd& ^^Use of different symbol and tri-colour flag ban in this regard. You may the aware that different parties like congress NCP can (Old) are using Bharat ma ka Hand clock. This may be baned are the parties not to be any symbol or tri-colour falg which is respectable flag with Ashoka Chark Congress (I) is not any party to do this type of acha Election Commision can do this of this regard letters have been admissed to M/o Have political parties cheap. mijksdr vkosnu tks vusdtj ih& ;gfd] nsfud tkxj.k y[kuå fnukad }kjk izdkf kr lekpkj i= ds vuqlkj &^^ pquko vk;ksx ds vkns k ij mrrjizns k ds fofhkuu LFkkuksa ij ek;korh vksj gkfkh dh ewfrz;ksa dks cq/kokj dks ijns ;s <d fn;k x;ka vk;ksx us blds fy;s 11 tuojh vkf[kjh rkjh[k eqdjzj dh FkhA eq[; fuokzpu vf/kdkjh us crk;k fd mugsa eksf[kd Lrj ij ;g lwpuk fey xbz gs fd lkjh izfrekvksa dks <dus dk dke iwjk dj fy;k x;k y[kuå esa eaxyokj kke ls kq: gqvk ewfrz;ksa dks ijns ds ihns djus dk dke cq/kokj nksigj ckn iwjk gks x;ka jkt/kkuh esa cus u;s Lekjdksa esa yxh eq[;ea=h ek;korh vksj gkfkh dh ewfrz;ksa dks <d fn;k x;ka blesa fofhkuu Lekjdksa esa yxh eq[;ea=h dh X;kjg izfrekvksa ds vklikl yksgs ds ikbiksa dks yxkdj mls IykbZ ls <dk x;ka tcfd gkfkh dh cm+s lkbt dh 126 vksj QkmaVsu esa yxh 172 ewfrz;ksa dks frjiky ls <dk x;ka nsj kke,ymh, mik/;{k dh rjq ls ftyk fuokzpu vf/kdkjh dks ;g fjiksvz Hkst nh xbza ogha] uks,mk ds lsdvj &95 flfkr jk Vªh; nfyr izsj.kk LFky,oa xzhu xkmzu ¼lsaVªy ikdz½ esa gkfkh dh ks k ewfrz;ksa dks <dus ds fy;s cq/kokj lqcg rdjhcu lk<+s uks cts ;q) Lrj ij dke kq: gqvka lcls cm+h pquksrh ikdz ds nwljs fgllsa esa cus 35 ehvj Å ps ler ewyd izrhd LraHk ij cuh gkfkh dh Ms<+ QhV Åaph pkj ewfrz;ksa dks <duk FkkA blds fy;s lhkh mik; viukus ds ckn nksigj rhu cts gkbmªksfyd IysVQkeZ eaxk;k x;k] ysfdu og LraHk ds f k[kj] rd ugha igqap ldka var esa vf/kdkfj;ksa us LraHk ds Åij cuh ewfrz;ksa dks u <dus dk fu.kz; fy;ka kke ikap ctrs&ctrs ek;korh dh ewfrz;ksa dks <dus ds fy;s yxk;s x;s liykbz cksmz ds dsl dks vu; ewfrz;ksa ds jax esa jaxdj dke iwjk dj fy;k x;ka xzsvj uks,mk izkf/kdj.k us Hkh cq/kokj dks uks,mk,dlvsa ku ds xksy pddj ij cus 12 [kahkksa ds uhps cuh gkfkh dh ewfrz;ksa dks <dus dk dke iwjk dj fy;ka ekeys esa vij ftykf?kdkjh ¼jktLo½ lozthrk jke us crk;k fd pquko vk;ksx dks ewfrz;ka <dus dh fjiksvz Hkst nh xbz blesa ;g Hkh crk fn;k x;k fd lerk ewyd izrhd LraHk dh Å pkbz dkqh T;knk gksus dh otg ls dkqh iz;kl ds ckotwn ml ij cuh gkfkh dh pkj izfrekvksa dks ugha <dk tk ldk xksjryc gs fd jktuhfrd nyksa dh f kdk;r ij ;gka pqukoh rs;kfj;ksa dh leh{kk djus vk;s eq[; fuokzpu vk;qdr us eq[;ea=h ek;korh dh izfrekvksa vksj gkfkh dks <dus ds vkns k fn;s FksA vkns k dk ekuuk Fkk fd jkt; esa lhkh nyksa ds fy;s pquko dk leku okrkj.k cukus ds fy;s ;g vko ;d gs fd izekf.kr izfrfyfi fuokzpu vk;ksx }kjk nh xbz tks vusdtj ih&239 58

59 231 ;gfd] ftyk fuokzpu vf/kdkjh kkagtgk iqj }kjk lwpuk ds vf/kdkj ds rgr fnukad dks Hksts x;s i= esa fy[kk x;k fd&^^ o kz 2012 ds fo/kkulhkk fuokzpu esa ewfrz;ksa dks <dus laca/kh dksbz dk;zokgh bl dk;kzy; ls ugha gqbz Fkh rfkk iz uxr dk;zokgh ds dksbz vfhkys[k bl dk;kzy; esa ugha mijksdr i= vusdtj ih& ;gfd] Hkkjr fuokzpu vk;ksx }kjk lwpuk ds vf/kdkj ds rgr fnukad dks Hksts x;s i= esa fy[kk x;k fd&^^vk;ksx }kjk o kz 2014 esa dksbz funsz k tkjh ugha fd;s x;s gs ¼gkFkh dh ewfrz;ksa dks <dus ds laca/k es½ tks vusdtj ih& ;gfd] ftyk fuokzpu vf/kdkjh y[kuå }kjk lwpuk ds vf/kdkj ds rgr fnukad dks Hksts x;s i= esa fy[kk x;k fd&^^ o kz 2012 ls 2017 rd ftyk fuokzpu vf/kdkjh y[kuå miyc/k vfhkys[kksa esa okafnr lwpuk miyc/k ugha mrrj izns k dks fn;s vkosnu ftlesa gkfk dk iatk fujlr djus gsrq dgk x;k gs] mijksdr lelr vkosnuksa dh izekf.kr izfrfyfia mijksdr i= vusdtj ih& ;gfd] ftyk fuokzpu vf/kdkjh xksrecq)uxj }kjk lwpuk ds vf/kdkj ds rgr fnukad dks Hksts x;s i= esa fy[kk x;k fd&^^ o kz 2012 ls 2017 rd ftyk fuokzpu vf/kdkjh o kz 2012 ls 2017 rd ftyk fuokzpu vf/kdkjh] xksrecq)uxj mrrj izns k dks fn;s vkosnu ftlesa xksrecq)uxj] m-iz- dks fdlh ds }kjk,slk vkosnu gkfk dk iatk fujlr djus gsrq dgk x;k gs] ugha fn;k x;k ftlesa gkfk dk iatk fujlr djus gsrq mijksdr lelr vkosnuksa dh izekf.kr izfrfyfia dgk x;k gksa mijksdr i= vusdtj ih& ;gfd] ftyk fuokzpu vf/kdkjh xksrecq)uxj }kjk lwpuk ds vf/kdkj ds rgr fnukad dks Hksts x;s i= esa fy[kk x;k fd&^^vkids }kjk xksrecq) fo ofo ky;] lwjtiqj,uvªh ikwbav] Mk- Hkhejko vecsmdj ikdz cknyiqj] xksrecq) ikdz cknyiqj] uks,mk ikdz lfgr ikap LFkyksa dh tkudkjh nh x;h Hkkjr fuokzpu vk;ksx ds i= la[;k 464@;wih&,y,@2012 fnukad ds vuqikyu esa tuin xksrecq)uxj esa rrle; <dh x;h ewfrz;ksa ds LFkku ds ernku dsunzksa ls nwjh lac/kh tkudkjh vkidks iwoz esa nh tk pqdh vk;ksx ds mdr i= ds vuqikyu esa vkidksa nh xbz lwpuk esa of.kzr LFkku lkoztfud LFkku@pkSjkgksa ij flfkr vkidksa nh xbz lwpuk ls vfrfjdr vu; fdlh LFkku ij ewfrz;ka ugha <dh xbza tks vusdtj ih & ;gfd] Hkkjr fuokzpu vk;ksx }kjk lwpuk ds vf/kdkj ds rgr fnukad dks Hksts x;s i= esa fy[kk x;k fd&^^ lanfhkzr Qkby vk;ksx esa <w<h ugha tk ldh gs vr% mlesa lnfhkzr nlrkost miyc/k ugha djk;s tk ldrs dsunzh; tu lwpuk vf/kdkjh us Qkby <wa<us dk u;k iz;kl fd;k ysfdu lqy ugha gqvka ;g ns[kk x;k fd Hkkjrh; jk Vªh; dkaxzsl dks ^gkfk* fpug vkcavu djus laca/kh vkns k dh izfr dsunzh; tu lwpuk vf/kdkjh }kjk igys gh nh tk pqdh pwafd lacaf/kr Qkby [kksth ugha tk ldh gs vr% bl flfkfr esa dksbz funsz k ugh fn;k tk ldrka** tks vusdtj ih& ;gfd] Hkkjr fuokzpu vk;ksx ds Jh izeksn dqekj kekz vij lfpo fnukad dks Jh jhrs k fejk kgmksy e-iz- }kjk fn;s x;s vius vkosnu dks fn;s x;s vkosnu dk tckc fn;k fd&^^mppre U;k;ky; dh flfoy vihy Øekad 3320&21@2001 bafm;u us kuy dkaxzsl ¼vkbZ½ cuke balvhv~;wv vkwq lks ky osyqs;j,oa vu; ,l lh lh 685 ds fnukad ds fu.kz; dh vksj vkd` V fd;k tkrk ftlesa mppre U;k;ky; }kjk ;g vfhkfu/kkzfjr fd;k x;k Fkk fd,sls ekeys ftuesa iathdj.k /kks[kk ;k tkylkth djds izkir fd;k x;k gs vksj ftlesa vk;ksx ds }kjk dksbz tkap djuk vko ;d ugha gsaa,sls dqn,d lhfer vioknksa dks NksM+dj vk;ksx dks fdlh jktuhfrd ny ds iath;u dks fujlr djus dk vf/kdkj ugha ** mijksdr i= fnukad tks vusdtj ih& ;gfd] vke vkneh ikvhz }kjk jk Vªh; /ot dks eap ij isafvx ¼insZ½ ds :i esa foøhr cukus ds fo:) dk;zokgh djus ds laca/k esa fxjh k kekz Xokfy;j }kjk fnukad dks Hkkjr fuokzpu vk;ksx] Jh vfer kkg v/;{k] x`g ea=ky; Hkkjr ljdkj dks Hkstk x;k i= dk tckc izeksn kekz vamj lsøsvjh }kjk fnukad dks fn;k x;k fd &^^Judgment of Hon ble High Court of Allahabad at Lucknow Bench in the W.P. (PIL-Civil) (/B) No. 603 of 2014 in Pratap Chandra Vs. Union of India & ors. A copy od the Commission s letter No. 509/35/2014- RCC dated sent to all recongised political parties in this matter is also forwarded for reference. mijksdr i= vusdtj ih& 247 gsaa 239 ;gfd] fnukad dks Jh gjh kadj tsu,moksdsv xkft;kckn }kjk Hkkjr fuokzpu vk;ksx dks fnukad dks,oa dks fn;s x;s vius vkosnu esa ikvhz flecy lekir fd;s tkus ds laca/k esa vt; dqekj oekz vamj lsøsavjh }kjk fn;s x;s vius tckc esa fy[kk x;k fd &^^Subject cited above and to state that the recsognition of political parties is governed by para 6A, 6B and the continued recognition by Para 6C of the Election Symbols (Reservation &Allotment) Order, The Para 6C of the said order was amended vide the Commission s Notification No. 56/Symbol / 2016 / PPS-II dated and the said amendment is deemed to have come into force with effecr from As per the amended provisions of Para 6C, Bahujan Samaj Party, Communist Party of India and Communist Party of India (Marxist) fulfil the criterion for continued recognition as a National Party. mijksdr i= vusdtj ih& 2482 gsaa 59

60 240 ;gfd] fnukad dks Jh,u-ds- vxzoky fnyyh }kjk Hkkjr fuokzpu vk;ksx dks fnukad dks fn;s x;s vius vkosnu esa ikvhz flecy lekir fd;s tkus ds laca/k esa izeksn dqekj kekz vamj lsøsavjh }kjk fn;s x;s vius tckc esa fy[kk x;k fd & ^^ Your letter dated on the subject cited above and to state that as per proviso to the Section 123 (3) of the Representation of people Act, 1951 no symbol allotted to a candidate shall be deemed to be a religious symbol or a national symbol. Further, it is also stated that the contentions in the complaint are not sufficient ground to withdraw the symbol that has been the reserved symbol of the Party for more than 20 years. mijksdr i= vusdtj ih& 2492 gsaa 241 ;gfd] fnukad dks Jh lquhy xksre xksrecq)uxj }kjk Hkkjr fuokzpu vk;ksx dks fnukad dks fn;s x;s vius vkosnu esa ikvhz flecy lekir fd;s tkus ds laca/k esa izeksn dqekj kekz vamj lsøsavjh }kjk fn;s x;s vius tckc esa fy[kk x;k fd & ^^fuokzpu izrhd ¼vkj{k.k,oa vkcavu½ vkns k] 1968 ds isjk 16 d ds izko/kkuksa ij fuhkzj djrk vkids }kjk of.kzr vk/kkj mijksdr isjk 16 d ds rgr fn;s x;s eku;rk fujlr djus ds nk;js ds varxzr ugha vkrs lkfk gh vkids }kjk of.kzr vk/kkjksa dks n`f Vxr j[krs gq;s vkidks ;g Hkh lwfpr fd;k tkrk gs fd fuokzpu fof/k esa gkfkh pquko fpug dk vkcavu jì djus dk bl lanhkz esa dksbz izko/kku ugha mijksdr i= vusdtj ih& 2502 gsaa 242 ;gfd] fnukad dks fxjh k kekz Xokfy;j }kjk vk/kkj i= ij fmtkbu ds :i esa ekdzj ls cukbz xbz dslfj;k] gjs jax dh cukbz xbz ykbuksa ds laca/k esa Jh nsosunz dqekj mifunsz kd Hkkjr fof k V igpku izkf/kdj.k }kjk fn;s x;s vius tckc fnukad esa fy[kk x;k fd&^^hkkjrh; fof k V igpku izkf/kdj.k] mlds f[kykq yxk;s x;s lhkh vkjksiksa dks [kkfjt djrk ukxfjdksa dks tkjh fd;s tk jgs ;w-vkbz-mh- i= ¼vk/kkj i=½ ij iznf kzr dslfj;k vksj gjh ykbusa ek= fø,fvo fmtkbu bu ykbuksa dk jk Vªh; >.Ms ls dksbz fyad ugha Hkkjrh; fof k V igpku izkf/kdj.k] jk Vªh; >.Ms dk leeku djrk vr% jk Vªh; leeku vf/kfu;e] 1971 ds vuqpnsn 2 dk myya?ku ugha fd;k x;k vksj u gh jk Vªh; >.Ms dk vieku fd;k x;k mijksdr i= vusdtj ih& gsaa 243 ;gfd] fnukad dks Hkkjr fuokzpu vk;ksx ds Jh vkj-ds- JhokLro }kjk tkjh i= la[;k&474@;w-ih- &,y-,-@2012 ds }kjk &**mdr i= ds lfefr ds i= la[;k 377@iz- ¼iz-½@2012 fnukad }kjk lfefr ds izcu/kk/khu Lekjdksa Øe k% MkW- Hkhejko vecsmdj lkekftd ifjorzu LFky ¼vkarfjd@ckg~;½ jaxkckbz vecsmdj fohkkx,oa laca/k {ks= eku;ok Jh dk khjke th xzhu ¼bZdks½ xkmzu] cks) fcgkj kkafr miou dk khjke th Lekjd LFky ds izca/kdksa dks Hkkjr fuokzpu vk;ksx }kjk iznrr funsz kksa ds Øe esa fu;kekuqlkj vko ;d dk;zokgh djkrs gq;s vuqikyu miyc/k djkus gsrq funszf kr fd;k x;ka buds vfrfjdr i= la[;k 376@iz- ¼iz-½@2012 fnukad }kjk izca/kd funsz kd m-iz- kkldh; fuekz.k fuxe fyfevsm eq[; vfhk;ark yks-fu-fo- eq[; vfhk;ark kk-fo-izkdks lfefr ds izca/kk/khu fofhkuu esa buds }kjk dk;znk;h lalfkk ds :i esa fofhkuu izdkj ds fuekz.k dk;z djk;s tkus ds n`f Vxr Hkkjr fuokzpu vk;ksx }kjk iz;qdr funsz kksa ds Øe esa fu;ekuqlkj vko ;d dk;zokgh djkrs gq;s vuqikyu O;k[;k lle; miyc/k djkus gsrq vuqjks/k fd;k x;ka MkW- Hkhejko vecsmdj lkekftd ifjorzu LFky ds laca/k esa fueu dk;zokgh dh xbz gs%& Lekjd ifjlj gkffk;ksa dh 78 ewfrz;ksa dks <d fn;k x;k Lekjd ifjlj izfrfcec LFky ij flfkr ekuuh; eq[;ea=h th dh ewfrz dks <d fn;k x;k Lekjd ifjlj esa flfkr ek- eq[;ea=h th dh ewfrz dks <d fn;k x;ka Lekjd ifjlj esa flfkr eq[; Lekjd,oa Lrwik Hkou dks can dj fn;k x;k Lekjd ifjlj esa flfkr dqy 96 Qkm.Ms ku ds uhps flfkr gkfkh ifjokj dh cm+h NksVh 48 ewfrz;ksa dks <d fn;k x;k Lekjd ifjlj esa flfkr f kyk iv~vs ds Åij LFkkfir 04 gkffk;ksa dh izfrekvksa dks <d fn;k x;k eku;oj Jh dk khjke th Lekjd LFky@ekU;oj Jh dk khjke th xzhu ekmszu@cks) kkafr miou ds laca/k esa folr`r vk[;k fueuor~ gs%&¼d½ eku;oj Jh dk khjke th Lekjd LFky Lekjd ifjlj esa flfkr gkfkh dh 30 ewfrz;ksa dks <d fn;k x;ka Lekjd ifjlj esaa flfkr eqx/kk Hkou dks can dj fn;k x;ka Lekjd ifjlj esa dqy 04 Qkm.VsUV~l ds uhps flfkr gkfkh ifjokj dh cm+h NksVh dqy ewfrz;ksa dks <d fn;k x;k ¼[k½ eku;ouj Jh dka khjke th xzhu ¼bZdks½ xkmzu xhrkiyyh jksm ij flfkr izns k }kj ij LFkkfir 04 gkffk;ksa dh ewfrz;ksa dks <d fn;k x;k bzdks xkmzu ds dqy 02 Qkm.VsUV~l ds uhps flfkr gkfkh ifjokj dh cm+h NksVh dqy 16 ewfrz;ksa dks <d fn;k x;k bzdks xkmzu ds lqfo/kk ifjlj esa flfkr dqy 05 Qkm.Ms ku ds flfkr ifjokj dh cm+h NksVh dqy 45 ewfrz;ksa dks <d fn;k x;k ¼x½ cks) fcgkj kkafr kkafr flfkr ek- eq[;ea=h th dh pkseq[kh ewfrz dks <d fn;k x;k mijksdr i= vusdtj ih& 2522 gsaa 244 ;gfd] fxjh k kekz Xokfy;j }kjk Hkkjr fuokzpu vk;ksx dks lwpuk ds vf/kdkj ds rgr fnukad dks fn;s x;s vkosnu eas pkgh xbz tkudkjh ds laca/k esa Jh ds-,q- foyýsm }kjk fn;s x;s tckc esa dgk fd&^^vfhkys[k dk iqu% [kkstus dk iz;kl fd;k,oa vk;ksx ds fjdkwmz :e esa bl laca/k esa,d Qkby ua 509@20@74 dk lanhkz feyka bl Qkby dks eaxkus ds fy;s fjdkwmz :e bapktz dks vuqjks/k fd;k x;k,oa mugksusa ;g lwfpr fd;k gs fd mdr Qkby [kksth ugha tk ldh mdr flfkfr esa dksbz izxfr ugha gqbza mdr vfhkys[k vhkh Hkh [kksts ugha tk lds pawfd lacaf/kr Qkby [kksth ugha tk ldh gs vr% bl flfkfr esa dksbz funsz k ugha fn;k tk ldrka** mijksdr i= vusdtj ih& 2532 gsaa 245 ;gfd] fxjh k kekz Xokfy;j }kjk Hkkjr fuokzpu vk;ksx dks lwpuk ds vf/kdkj -ds rgr fnukad dks fn;s x;s vkosnu eas pkgh xbz tkudkjh ds laca/k esa Jh latho dqekj izlkn }kjk fn;s x;s tckc esa dgk fd&^^ yksdlhkk fuokzpu {ks= jk;cjsyh ls Lo- bafnjk vkidk iz u iwjh rjg Li V ugha rfkkfi vkidksa ;g xka/kh }kjk ym+s x;s pquko dks kwu;?kksf kr fd;s lwfpr fd;k tkrk gs fd mfpr iz;kl ds ckotwn vk;ksx ds 60

61 tkus ds laca/k esa dh xbz dk;zokgh ls lacaf/kr fjdkmz esa lacaf/kr QkbZy dks ugha <wa<k tk ldk blds leiw.kz Qkby dh izekf.kr izfrfyfia izkir gksus ij bldh lwpuk vkidks nh tk;sxha mijksdr i= vusdtj ih& 254 gsaa 246 ;gfd] fxjh k kekz Xokfy;j }kjk Hkkjr fuokzpu vk;ksx dks lwpuk ds vf/kdkj -ds rgr fnukad dks fn;s x;s vkosnu eas pkgh xbz tkudkjh ds laca/k esa Jh ds-,q- foyýsm }kjk fn;s x;s tckc esa dgk fd&^^vkosnu esa lanfhkzr O;fDr dh laln dh lnl;rk ls gvkus laca/kh vk;ksx dk dksbz vkns k ugha ** mijksdr i= vusdtj ih& 255 gsaa 247 ;gfd] fxjh k kekz Xokfy;j }kjk Hkkjr fuokzpu vk;ksx dks lwpuk ds vf/kdkj -ds rgr fnukad dks fn;s x;s vkosnu eas pkgh xbz tkudkjh ds laca/k esa Jh lquhrk flag }kjk fn;s x;s tckc esa dgk fd&^^vr% dì;k okafnr vfhkys[k ds fooj.k lfgr vkosnu Hkstus dk d V djs rkfd lacaf/kr ij O;fDr ¼Third Party) ls fu;ekuqlkj lgefr i= izkir dj mlds vkosnu@vfhkys[k ;fn dksbz gks rks] dh izfr miyc/k djk;h tk ldsa lwpuk ds vf/kdkj vf/kfu;e 2005 ds varxzr lwpuk,oa vfhkys[k ds rkri;z ls lacaf/kr fooj.k mdr vf/kfu;e dh /kkjk 2 ¼p½,oa 2 ¼>½ esa miyc/k bl laca/k esa ;g Hkh voxr djkuk gs fd flecy fn;s tkus@fujlr fd;s tkus ds fu.kz; laca/kh dk;z Hkkjr fuokzpu vk;ksx }kjk leikfnr fd;s tkrs ** mijksdr i= vusdtj ih& 256 gsaa 248 ;gfd] fxjh k kekz Xokfy;j }kjk Hkkjr fuokzpu vk;ksx dks lwpuk ds vf/kdkj -ds rgr fnukad dks fn;s x;s vkosnu eas pkgh xbz tkudkjh ds laca/k esa Jh vjfoan dqekj ik.ms; }kjk fn;s x;s tckc esa dgk fd&^^yksdlhkk lkeku; fuokzpu 2014 ls lacaf/kr vfhkys[kksa esa yksdlhkk lkeku; fuokzpu&2014 ds nksjku y[kuå o xksrecq)uxj esa fofhkuu LFkkuksa ij yxh gqbz gkfkh dh ewfrz;ksa dks <ds tkus ds laca/k esa ftyk fuokzpu vf/kdkjh] y[kuå rfkk xksrecq)uxj }kjk ekaxs x;s ekxzn kzu laca/kh dksbz i= miyc/k ugha gs rfkk u gh bl laca/k esa ftyk fuokzpu vf/kdkjh] y[kuå rfkk xksrec)uxj dks ekxzn kzu laca/kh dk;kzy; dk dksbz i= miyc/k ** mijksdr i= vusdtj ih& 257 gsaa 245 ;gfd] fxjh k kekz Xokfy;j }kjk fnukad dks ftyk fuokzpu vf/kdkjh xksrecq)uxj }kjk eq[; fuokzpu vf/kdkjh y[kuå dks fnukad dks Hksts x;s i= esa fy[kk x;k fd& ftyk fuokzpu vf/kdkjh y[kuå,oa xksrecq)uxj 2014 esa ftyk fuokzpu vf/kdkjh] xksrecq)uxj }kjk }kjk o kz 2014 ds yksdlhkk fuokzpu dh izfø;k esa Hkkjr fuokzpu vk;ksx ubz fnyyh,oa eq[; fuokzpu vkn kz vkpkj lafgrk ls lacaf/kr ekxzn kzu ftlesa vf/kdkjh m-iz- y[kuå dks yksd lhkk fuokzpu dh y[kuå o xksrecq)uxj esa fofhkuuk LFkkuksa ij yxh izfø;k esa vkn kz vkpkj lafgrk ls lacaf/kr tuin gqbz gkfkh dh ewfrz;ksa dks <ds tkus ds laca/k esa Hksts xksrecq)uxj esa fofhkuu LFkkuksa ij yxh gqbz gkfkh dh x;s vkosnu i= o vkns k if=dk dh iazekf.kr izfra ewfrz;ksa dks <ds tkus ds laca/k esa dksbz vkosnu i= o vkns k if=dk ugha Hksth xbza mijksdr i= vusdtj ih& 258 gsaa 246 ;gfd] ftyk fuokzpu vf/kdkjh y[kuå }kjk eq[; dk;zikyu vf/kdkjh m-iz- dks fn;s x;s i= fnukada ds vuqlkj &^^yksdlhkk lkeku; fuokzpu 2014 ds vkn kz vkpkj lafgrk ls lacaf/kr dk;kzy; esa miyc/k vfhkys[kksa dk voyksdu fd;k x;ka mdr vfhkys[kksa esa yksdlhkk lkeku; fuokzpu 2014 dh izfø;k esa vkn kz vkpkj lafgrk ls lacaf/kr ekxzn kzu ftlesa fofhkuu LFkkuksa ij yxh gqbz gkfkh dh ewfrz;ksa dks <ds tkus ds laca/k esa Hksts x;s vkosnu i=,oa vkns k if=dk dh izfr miyc/k ugha mijksdr i= vusdtj ih& 259 gsaa 247 ;gfd] jkt; fo/kku lhkk fuokzpu m-iz- o kz 2017 dh vkns k if=dk 437/ECI/ LET / TERR/NS-III-UP/2017 fnukad &^^In this regard, it is submitted that the Commission via its order dated instructed that at time of ongoing electrons, each and every statue of BSP s symbol elephant constructed /erected in public place in U.P. at the government expense, shall be suitably covered so that they do not disturb the level playing field during the elections. vkns k if=dk fnukad ] ] ] ] ] mijksdr vkwmzj khv vusdtj ih& 260 gsaa 248 ;gfd] Hkkjr fuokzpu vk;ksx ds phq lsøsvjh Shri S.L. Shakdher }kjk vkns k fnukad 25 tuojh 1978 tkjh fd;k tks fueukuqlkj gs%& The short question for determination in the present case at this stage is whether the Commission is satisfied on information in its possession that there are two rival groups of Indian National Congress each of whom claims to be that party within the meaning of paragraph 15 of the Election Symbols (Reservation and Allotment) order, 1968 (hereinafter referred to as the symbols order) and whether the commission is called upon the conduct a detailed enquiry into the matter for determining as to which of those groups is the real party. The Indian National Congress is a recognized National party for the purposes of the Election Symbols order. Its registered office in the records of the Commission is at 5, Dr. Rajendra Prasad Road, New Delhi. The symbol Calf and Cow is reserved for that party in all states and Union territories. On 2 nd January 1978 at about p.m., the Commission received a letter from Shri K. Brahmanand Reddi, 5 Dr. Rajendra Prasad Road, New Delhi in which he informed the Commission that he was the duly elected President of the Indian National Congress. In that letter, he also gave the names of two g eneral secretaries of the party viz., Shri V.B. Raju and K.C. Pant. In that letter, he further stated that he had heard an announcement over the All Indian Radio that day to the effect that Smt. Indira Gandhi was the President of the Indian National Congress. He described that report as incorrect and stated that if any other organization was formed under the name and style of Indian National Congress, that was illegal and 61

62 unconstitutional. He further claimed that the symbol Calf and Cow was reserved for the party of which he was the duly elected President. On 5 th January, 1978, the Commission received a telegram dated from Shri Buta Singh who described himself s the General Secretary of All Indian congress Committee C/o 9, Janpath, New Delhi. In that telegram he stated that he had gathered from the press reports that Shri Brahmananda Reddi Purporting to be the President of the Indian National congress, had claimed the symbol Calf and Cow of the Indian National Congress. He stated that after the expiry of two years from the election of the President of the Indian National Congress of its plenary session held in December 1975 at Chandigarh, Smt. Indira Gandhi had been duly elected on 2 nd January, 1978as the President of the party unanimously at a meeting of the delegates, including a majority of the members of the All India Congress Committee. He contended that Shri Brahmananda Reddi had no Locus Standi to claim the symbol. He further stated that a formal claim was being lodged before the commission in a few days. The above telegram of Shri Buta Singh was followed by a letter dated 7 th January 1978 from Smt. Indira Gandhi. In that letter, she informed the Commission that a convention of Congressmen was held at New Delhi on 1stand 2 nd January, 1978 which consisted of the members of the All Indian Congress Committee, delegates of the State Congress Committees, MPs, MLAs and MLCs Ex- MPs, Ex- MLAs, Ex- MLCs belonging to the Indian National Congress, Presidents of the District Congress Committees and a large number of office bearers of Pradesh Congress Committees and District Congress Committees from all over the Country. The all India Congress Committee members present at that convention unanimously elected her as the President of the Indian National Congress as the term of office of Shri Brahmananda Reddi had already expired on the 31 st December, 1977 in terms of article VI of the Constitution of the Indian National Congress. With that letter, she also enclosed a copy of the resolution purported to have been passed at the said convention electing her as the President of the Indian National Congress. She further stated in that letter that she had subsequently appointed Smt. M. Chndrashekhran, M.P. as the treasurer and Shri Buta Singh, Ex-M.P. as the General Secretary of the Party. She further stated that the claim of Shri Brahmananda Reddi as the President of the Indian National Congress was illegal and unteriable. She also stated in that letter that the registered office of the Indian National Congress at 5, Dr. Rajendra Prasad Roadwith sub offices at 3 and 5 Raisina Road, New Delhi were in unlawful and unconstitutional possession of Shri Brahmananda Reddi proceeding further in the matter, the c ommission thought it fit to invite the comments of Shri Brahmananda Reddi in the letter of Smt. Indira Gandhi and also Smt. Gandhi s comments on Shri Reddi s letter dated Accordingly, two letters were sent to them on the 12 th January 1978 in which they were asked to give their comments by the 16 th January, By subsequent letters dated 13 January, 1978, they were also asked to file relevant documents in support of their comments by the aforesaid state i.e. 16 th January In reply to these communications dated the 12 th and 13 th January, 1978 of the Election Commission, both Shri Brahmananda Reddi and Smt. Indira Gandhi filed their replies on the 16 th January, In their replies, both of them denied the claim of the other to be the president of the Indian National Congress and reiterated their claims to be the duly elected President of the Indian National Congress. The reply statement of Shri Brahmananda Reddi was duly supported by various documents, annexed as Annexures A to R. Smt. Indira Gandhi, however, stated that the time given for the purpose of offering comments was too short and requested that at least 3 week s time may be granted for the purpose of making full and adequate submissions of fact and law in support of her comments in rebuttal of the claims made by Shri Brahmananda Reddi. In view of the close proximity of the general elections to the legislative Assemblies of certain states/ Union territory, the Commission was quite anxious to dispose of this matter as expeditiously as possible, with that en in view, the Commission asked by its letter dated both the parties to appear before the Commission on that day in the evening at 4.00 p.m. On that day, at the appointed hour Dr. Syid Mohd., S/Shri Shankar Ghosh, Janak Raj Jai and V.P. Nanda, Advocates appeared before the Commission on behalf of Shri K. Brahmananda Reddi. On behalf of Smt. IndiraGandhi, and representative produced an application before the Commission in which Smt. Indira Gandhi prayed that as a very short notice had been given the matter might be adjourned for a week to enable her to make necessary arrangements for appearance before the Commission through her counsel. This application was vehemently apposed by the counsel for Shri Brahmananda Reddi. They submitted that the real object of the application of Smt. IndiraGandhi for adjournment of the proceedings was really to delay the proceedings so that the Commission may be frustrated in its attempt to dispose of the matter before the issue of the notification calling the general elections which were expected to be issued in the course of a week and as such the counsel for Shri Reddi pleaded with the Commission to proceed with the case, failing which the counsel prayed that the matter might be taken upon the next day. The representative of Smt. Indira Gandhi then prayed that the hearing may be fixed on the day following the next day i.e. on the 19 th January. The Commission granted the request. The matter was fixed for hearing on the 19 th with the further direction that the proceedings will go on from day to day and no further adjournment would be granted as the Commission anxiety was to decide the matter as early as possible. Accordingly, the day to day hearings in the matter were held on the 9 th, 20 th, 21 st and the 23 rd January, 1978 at which hearings both the parties were represented by their Counsel. At the hearing on the 19 th January, 1978, Shri D.D. Chawla, Counsel for Smt. Indira Gandhi, assisted by S/ Shri B.R.L. Iyengar and C.L Chawdhary, Advocate moved an application. It was inter alia stated in that application that a dispute had arised between two rival groups of the Indian National Congress which the Commission was called upon to decide in terms of 62

63 paragraph 15 of the Symbols Order. He contended that the dispute had to be decided by the Commission in the light of the judgment of the Supreme Court in Sadiq Ali and others Vs Election Commission of India (AIR 1972 SC 187). According to him, the rationale of the Supreme Court s decision in the above case was that the test of majority and numerical strength was not only germane and relevant but very valuable test. He went to the extent of suggesting that the test of majority was the sole test to be applied by the Commission while deciding disputes between the rival groups of recognized political parties. In that premise, Shri Chawla contended that the Commission had necessarily to as certain the numerical strength of the rival groups to come to a decision as to which group was the real party and for that purpose it was necessary that a reasonable opportunity be given to them to adduce evidence both oral and by affidavits to substantiate their claim of majority. The above contention of Shri Chawla was contested by Dr. Syid Mohd. And Shri Shankar Chose, Advocates for Shri K. Brahmananda Reddi. They contended that before the Commission could embark upon a detailed enquiry, it must prima facie be satisfied on information in its possession that there were two rival groups of a party each of whom claimed to be that party. Unless the Commission was Prime facies satisfied that there were claims and counter- claims by two groups to be a particular party, the commission could not go in to the question of determination of the dispute. They urged that a claim to come within the purview of paragraph 15 of the symbols Order must be a legal claim on a claim having some semblance of locality. Each and every claim howsoever frivolous, would not attract the provisions of paragraph 15. The counsel for Shri Brahmananda Reddi submitted that the party had a written constitution and Shri brahmananda Reddi was the duly objected president in accordance with the provisions of the Constitution of the party. He denied the claim of Smt. Indira Gandhi that the term of office of Shri Brahmananda Reddi expired on 31 st December He submitted that article VI of the Constitution on which reliance was being put by the Counsel for Smt. Indira Gandhi, provided that the term of office of every committee of the Congress and its office beared was ordinarily two years. This would not mean that immediately on the expiration of the two year s period, the term of office of a committee of its office beared would automatically come to an end. Shri Shankar Ghosh suggested that articles VI was not even relevant in the case of term of office of the President of the Indian National Congress as the President was not an office bearer of a committee of the Congress but was the president of the organization. Dr. Syid Mohd. pointed out that as late as on 31 st December, 1977, Smt. Indira Gandhi in her letter of the same date (Annexure N of the written statement, dated of Shri Brahmananda Reddi) had recognized Shri Brahmananda as the President of the Indian National Congress. He argued that it was a well accepted principle of law that once a thing is shown or proved to exist, then the presumption will be that it continued to exist for a reasonable period of time, unless the contrary is conclusively proved. In support of his contention, he relied on the provisions of section 114 of the Evidence Act, His argument was that having accepted Shri Brahmananda Reddi as the President of the Indian National Congress on 31 December, 1977, it was for Smt. Indira Gandhi to conclusively prove that she had been subsequently duly elected in accordance with the provisions of the Constitution of the Indian National Congress in place of Shri Brahmananda Reddi. He submitted that under the constitution of the Indian National Congress, the President of the Party continued in office until a vacancy in that office arose by reason of his resignation of death and until new President elected in accordance with the provisions of article XVIII, took over. More of these eventualities could t show to exist on 2 nd January, 1978 by Smt. Indira Gandhi when she claimed to have been duly elected. He further argued that under the Constitution of the Congress, the president could be elected under article XVIII either by the delegates or by the AICC members. The co- called convention of 2 nd January 1978 could neither be termed as a session of the delegates not a meeting of the AICC as it was not convened by the authorities authorised i.e. Congress working committee to cell the plenary session or the AICC meeting of the Indian National Congress. Consequently, the claim of Smt. Indira Gandhi to be the President of the Indian National Congress was an illegal and a frivolous claim which deserved to be rejected in limine. Shri Chawla, however, submitted that for the purposes of paragraph 15 the constitution of a party was not relevant and the decision of the commission could not depend on the question of legality or illegality of the actions by the rival groups in accordance with the party constitution. He submitted that under paragraph 15 what the Commission was required to see was whether there were in fact two rival groups each of whom claimed to be the Indian National Congress. He said that in the present case it was evident from the letter dated 2 nd January, 1978 of Shri K. Brahmananda Reddi and letter dated of Smt. Indira Gandhi and other documents filed by the respective groups that there were undoubtedly two groups of the party led by Smt. Indira Gandhi and Shri Brahmananda Reddi respectively. In this context, he also produced before me some press reports to show that there were simmering differences amongst the leadership of the party a result of which two groups emerged in the party known as pro Reddi group and pro Indira Group. The growing discontentment in the pro Indira group against resulted in a move to requisition a special session of the All India Congress Committee but this move was however postponed in the wake of certain moves to bring about unity. The subsequent developments in the party however led to the resignation of Smt. Indira Gandhi and 7 of her supporters from the Congress working committee and this culminated in the convention of the Indian National Congress being called and held on 2 nd January, 1978 where Smt. Indira Gandhi was elected as the president of the Party. He said that there was a clear cleavage in the party from top to bottom and it was split in two distinct groups and that should be sufficient for the purposes of the satisfaction of the Commission that there was a dispute 63

64 between two groups of the party which needed to be resolved in terms of paragraph 15 of the symbols order. Though he admitted that the Constitution of a party was important but nonetheless contended that the party constitution was not relevant for the purposes of the paragraph 15 of the symbols order and the Commission should not unduly attach importance to the party constitution. I am not inclined to agree with the view of Shri Chawla that for the purposes of paragraph 15 of the Symbols order, to constitution of a party is not germane. His contention does not stand to reason in view of the face that the whole case as made out in the various letters and applications of Smt. Indira Gandhi and the telegram dated 4 th January, 1978 of Shri Buta Singh is that Smt. Indira Gandhi is the duly elected president of the Indian National Congress in accordance with the provisions of the Constitution of the party. I also do not find anything in the Supreme Court s judgment in Sadiq Ali s case (supra) on which reliance was placed by Shri Chawla that the Commission should not look into the party constitution at all and as soon as a claim howsoever frivolous is preferred the commission should proceed to count the heads for and against that claim. In this view of mind, I am fortified by the decisions of the Supreme Court in Rama Shankar Kaushik Vs Election Commission of India (1974 (2) SCR 275) and APHIC Vs Captain William Sangma (AIR 1977 SC 2155) on which considerable reliance was placed by Shri Shankar Ghosh. The decision in these cases rested on the question of legality of action taken by the parties according to their party constitution or accepted principles and not solely on the majority test. In the Sadiq Ali s case to which frequent reference was made by the Learned Counsel for Smt. Indira Gandhi, nowhere had it been stated as to what along would constitute the test or tests in respect of a matter filling to be determined within the meaning of paragraph 15 of the symbols order. Once again the commission cannot resist the temptation to draw attention to the observations made by the Supreme Court in the APHLC case (which are very much relevant to the present case). As regards the question of test being applied generally in respect of the determination of any specific matter, the Supreme Court of the determination of any specific matter, the Supreme Court in the APHLC case said the tests are not exhaustive in all cases. It is also well settled that all the tests laid down may not be present in a given case, while some tests may be present, others may be locking,. From this, it could easily be inferred that it is not humanly possible to lay down any particular test as a litmus test which and which alone would govern a matter which has to be determined by a judicial or a quasi judicial body or authority. To take a view that the Commission, while deciding cases falling under paragraph 15 of the symbols order should not be concerned with the party constitution would be to introduce utter chaos in the functioning of political parties in the country and the operation of the symbols order would be rendered a plaything between the various shades of opinion or groups in a political party. It cannot be gainsaid that a group claiming to be a particular party must abide by its own constitution which imposes contractual obligation on its members, unless it is shown that a clear impose had been reached where the functioning of the party could not be carried on in accordance with its own constitution. To ensure a healthy standard of political life, the commission should not lay down any procedure which will make it easy for the established political parties to break up at the slightest pretext. The Commission considers that a group or section which wants to form a rival group within a party must declare itself arrival group and assert that there has been a split in the party. It must show that it has exhausted all the remedies available to it under the constitution of the party to assert its majority but that the other group has frustrated its efforts whimsically or capriciously and is not itself functioning in accordance with the provisions of the constitution of the party or democratic norms. The rival group must also show that it has no alternative but to come to the Commission to establish its majority in the party. In the present case, no such situation has been shown to exist. On the contrary, my attention was drawn by the counsel for Shri Brahmananda Reddi to a press statement given by Shri Kamlapati Tripathi, a leader of the conventionists, on 29 th December, In that press statement, he denied the existence of a split in the party and further stated that the convention being organized on the 1 st and 2 nd January was not a rival AICC meeting and would not discuss the organizational problems of the party but would bring out the failure of the Janta Party and would formulate a programme which would be sent to the congress working committee for their acceptance and passing down to congress workers. Shri Chawla did not deny the statement attributed to Shri Kamlapati Tripathi but stated that the statement of Shri Kamlapati Tripathi was his own personal opinion and could not be taken to be stand of the party; Shri Chwla not not produce any document to show why the convention was called. He could not in any case show any positive proof that the convention was a rival group in the party or that it had been called to discuss the split in the party. I was also referred to a letter written by Smt. Indira Gandhi to Shri K. Brahmananda Reddi on 31 st December 1977 i.e. a day prior to the date of the convention held on 1 st and 2 nd January, In that letter which related to the organizational matters of the U.P. Congress Committee, Smt. Indira Gandhi had clearly recognized Shri Brahmananda Reddi as the President of the Indian National Congress and had also promised to send another communication on the subject matter. To my mind, these references show that there was no split in the party on 31 December, Shri Chawla submitted that the split came about in the party on the 2 nd January, 1978, when the Convention was held and Smt. Indira Gandhi was elected President of the party. Shri Chawla has, however, not produced any papers or documents to show me as to how and under what circumstances it became necessary to call the convention, who called the convention, what was the agenda of the Convention and when it was circulated, who were invited to attend that convention and how many delegates or the AICC members actually attended that convention. Nor was any attendance register, showing the names of delegates or members produced before me. Shri Chwla admitted beforeme that the Convention 64

65 was foreign to the Constitution of the Indian National Congress; but he failed to given any satisfactory explanation for resorting to this extra- constitutional method. The reference of the Supreme Court in the APHLC case to the conference of 81 members as being unmandated for the purpose would, in my opinion, seem to apply with equal force to the instant case wherein the Convention was held on the 1 st and 2 nd January, 1978 ostensibly for the purpose of highlighting the Commissions and omissions of the Janata party but in reality (as it finally emerged) to achieve a different result of getting a new President elected in a non- existent vacancy. In this context, is may also not be out of place to draw attention to a significant observation made by the Supreme Court in the APHLC case (supra) to the effect that it is rather intriguing that the agenda in the notice, with such a short interval, did not even specifically mention about discussion of the issue of merger with the INC even to facilitate the news of this move to trickle far and wide which remarks would be apposite in the present case, judged in the context of the hurried convention at which Smt. Gandhi is stated to have been elected.in spite of the fact that sufficient time was given to Shri Chawla to file all the relevant documents and furnish full information on these vital matters, no such papers were brought on record to enable me to come to the satisfaction that a dispute really existed within the meaning of paragraph 15 of the Symbols Order. In the circumstances, I do not see that sufficient Information has been made available to me to come to a prima facie conclusion that there are two rival groups of the Indian National Congress each of whom claims, to be Indian National Congress each of whom claims to be that party which alone would require me to conduct a detailed enquiry to determine which of those two rival groups is the Indian National Congress. But I do not wish to dismiss the application of Smt. Indira Gandhi at this stage. I propose to keep the matter pending till sufficient material and evidence is adduced before me to be satisfied on the preliminary point that a dispute has really arisen between two rival groups of the Indian National Congress. Unless such information and evidence is brought forth, it will be unwise on the part of the Election Commission to deprive a National Party of its right to use its reserved symbol at elections. The general elections in the States of Andhra Pradesh, Assam, Karnataka, Maharashtra, Meghalaya and the Union Territory of Arunachal Pradesh are in the offing. As stated above, a National Party consisting of millions of members who are entitled to the use of its reserved symbol cannot be denied of such right merely because someone claims to represent the party without however, Prima Facie satisfying the Commission of any substance in that claim. To emphasise the special urgency which is a paramount consideration in cases of this kind. It may once again be useful to recall the observations of the Supreme Court in the APHLC case for deciding matters relating to elections with promptitude. The Supreme Court observed that the Commission is empowered on its own right under Article 324 of the Constitution and also under rules 5 and 10 of the Rules to make directions in general in widest terms necessary and also in specific cases in order to facilitate a free and fair election with promptitude. It is, therefore, legitimate on the part of the Commission to make general provisions even in anticipation or in the light of experience in respect of matters relating to symbols. These observations of the Supreme Court would go a long way, in high- lighting what is even otherwise self- evident, namely, that the symbols order is, therefore, a compendium of directions in the shape of general provisions to meet various kinds of situations appertaining to elections with particular reference to symbol. To emphasise the valuable significance of a symbol to a party, the Supreme Court, in the APHLC case, stated that for the purpose of holding elections, allotment of symbol will find a prime place in a country where illiteracy is still very high. It has been found from experience that symbol as a device for casting votes in favour of a candidate of one s choice has proved an invaluable aid. Apart from this, just as people develop a sense of honour, glory and patriotic pride for a flag of one s country, similarly great favour and emotions are generated for a symbol representing a political party. This is particularly so in a parliamentary democracy which is conducted on party lines. People after a time identify themselves with the symbol and the flag. These are great unifying insignia which cannot all of a sudden be effaced. In the circumstances of the present case, I therefore propose and do hereby order that status quo ante be maintained in the matter of allotment of symbol calf and cow. Accordingly that symbol would continue to be allotted to the candidates set up by the Indian National Congress having its registered office, at, and functioning from 5, Rajendra Prasad Road, New Delhi which has hither to been recognished by the Commission, and having the office bearers as entered in the records of the Commission. New Delhi (S.L. Shakdher) 25 th January, 1978 Chief Election Commissioner of India tks vusdtj ih& ;gfd] Hkkjr fuokzpu vk;ksx ds phq lsøsvjh Shri S.L. Shakdher }kjk vkns k fnukad dks tkjh fd;k tks fueukuqlkj gs%&^^ Indian National Congress has been a recognished national party under the Election Symbols (Reservation and allotment) order, 1968 (hereinafter referred to as the Symbols order). It is a voluntary association with its own constitution and rules regulating its working at different levels and organs of the party. It has been continuously playing a deadnent role in the country s affairs both before the after independence. It has also been able to form successively the Governments at the Union level after every general election except after the general election to Lok Sabha held in 1977 when it suffered a set back. Similarly, it has been in power in many states. A major dispute arose in 1969 between two rival sections in the party which came up for determination before the Commission under the symbols order. The decision given then in January, 1971 on the dispute applying the test of majority at the organizational and legislature vinge had been upheld by the Supreme Court on appeal filed by the aggrieved party. The Indian National Congress 65

66 suffered defeat at the General Election to Lok Sabha held in Subsequently in aid term poll held in the same year in several States it cessed to be ruling party in those states as well. This turn of events and change in its fortune eroded the solidarity of the party enjoyed till then and there were siezering differences in the party. The commission received a letter on the 7 th January, 1978 from Smt. Indira Gandhi to the effect that a convention of congress non was held at New Delhi on the 1 st and 2 nd January 1978 which consisted members of the All Indian Congress Committee delegates of the State Congress Committes, M.P., MLAs, MLCs, Ex, MPs, EX, MLAs, and Ex, MLC belonging to the Indian National Congress, President of the District Congress Committee and that at that convention members present unanimously elected her as the President of the Party as the term of office of Shri Brahmananda Reddy had already expired on the 31 st December, 1977 in term of article VI of the Constitution of the Party. After receiving the comments of Shri Brahmananda Reddy who, according to the records of the Commission, was then the president of the Party and hearing both the sides on their respective contentions, the commission decided, by its order dated the 25 January, 1978, that the Statue quo ante be maintained in the matter of allotment of symbol calf and cow and that accordingly, the symbol would continue to be allotted to the candidates set up by Indian Congress having its registered office at, and functioning from, 5 Dr. Rajendra Prasad Road, New Delhi, which had highests been recognished by the Commission. This was an interim order and case to be passed for the reason that sufficient information and documents had not been made available to the Commission by the Group led by Smt. Gandhi to satisfy that there were two rival groups in the party each of whom claimed to be that party which alone would required the commission to conduct a detailed enquiry to determine which of those two rival groups was, the Indian National Congress. At the same time, the order of the 25 th January, 1978, made it clear that the Commission did not wish to dismiss the application of Smt. Indira Gandhi dated the 7 th January 1978 for recognizing her group as the Indian National Congress and that the matter should be kept pending till sufficient material and evidence were adduced before the Commission to satisfy it on the preliminary point that the dispute had really arisen between two rival groups of the Indian National Congress. At that time general elections to a number of legislative assemblies of States were impending.by a subsequent order dated the 2 nd February, 1978 passed again pending the final order as contemplated in the Commission s order dated the 25 th January 1978 the Commission decided, on the basis of the materials furnished by the group led by Smt. Gandhi and after hearing both the groups that the group in the Indian National Congress consisting of persons owing allegiance to Smt. Gandhi be known as the Indian National Congress (i) that the said INC (I) be recognished as a National Party and that the symbol hand be reserved for the said INC (X). Thereafter, the INC and INC (I) contested the general elections to the various legislative assemblies of states held in February March 1978 and the various bye- elections to Lok Sabha and the Legislative Assemblies with the reserved symbol Calf and Cow and Hand respectively. On the 3 rd October, 1978, Shri Buta Singh, General Secretary of the group led by Smt. Indira Gandhi, i.e. INC (I), filed a petition dated the 30 th September 1978 urging the Commission to accept his party s earlier application dated the 7 th January, 1978 for recognizing the group led by Smt. Gandhi as the Indian National Congress in the light of the Statements made in the petition. In support of this claim the group started filing from the 9 th April, 1979 a large number of documents containing individual affidavits from the members of the Lok Sabha, Rajya Sabha, state legislative Assemblies, AICC, PCC, defected party candidates at relevant general elections in support of its claim as to the majority of the group in these organs. On the other hand, the INC group, now led by Shri Devraj Ura, contested the claim of the INC (I) on legal ground based on party constitution and did not to furnish substantial evidentiary material to contest the claim of INC (I). This group filed very few individual affidavits. Here, it would be pertinent to state that in the Commission s view, a dispute between two rival groups in a party as contemplated in paragraph 15 of the symbols order cannot be construed as a dispute of civil or criminal nature. Such a dispute is basically and essentially a political dispute and has to be judged from political standards and practices. The commission gave full and adequate opportunity to hath the group to yet forth their case giving them repeated opportunities and to file resuments, affidavits etc and to argue their case at length. Thus, proceedings went on for one reason or the other till July 1981, for about 3 ½ years. Another important respect and principle which should not last night of deciding such cases is that each rival group has to place its claim fully on its own merits imported by adquates proof and should not rest its case scalely or partly or the weakness of the claim made by the opposite group. It is common knowledge that in the matter of adherence to the provisions of the party constitution both the groups were not following those provisions. Both the groups of party of there jointly before or separately after, the split were carrying on their affairs on ad hoc basic. The office bearers in various organs of the party including the party President were often appointed without following the norms for their elections laid down in the constitution of the party and kept in office much after their terms had expired. The last organizational elections in the party are reported to have been held as long back as 1972.The procedures for the formation of the working committee of the party which took decisions of far reaching nature changing the course of events of the part, policies and even membership of important leaders, underwent such a change from time to time outside the provisions of the Constitution of the party as to make the set up of the working committee itself beyond recognition from the original concepts as laid down in the constitution. The Commission cannot also ignore another phenomenon taking place in the party. The leaders in both the groups have been resorting to changes in allegiance. These happenings have been going on unabated and in quick succession, and more so, in the case of members of the working committee and many top 66

67 leaders. Having regard to the above considerations, when both the groups do not follow the provisions of the constitution and rather systematically flout these throwing them to winds, it is futile to expect the commission to apply only the norms based on the provisions of the constitution for the determination of the dispute. Such a course would be perverse and unreal. On the basis of the documents and affidavits filed by both the groups and the facts as disclosed, the commission by its order dated 29 th November, 1979 decided that there existed and rival groups in the INC each of whom claimed to be that party. Consequently, the dispute has to be decided on the basis of the facts and circumstances as envimaged in paragraph 15 of the symbols order. Having come to such a conclusion, it became necessary to fix a date on which, the split in the party formality took glace. The commission after hearing both the sides decided the 2 nd January, 1978 as the date on which the split took place. The two rival groups were therefore required to establish their claim of majority among members of the party as they existed on 2 nd January, Both the rival groups were given full and adequate opportunity to file documents in support of their claims as to its strength in the organizational and legislature wings. In October 1979, the Commission clearly indicated that the relative strength would be decided on the basis of the list furnished by both the sides and individual affidavits in support thereof. For this purpose, the commission fixed the last date as 29 th October, 1979 while the group led by Smt. Indira Gandhi filed a large member of such individual affidavits, the other group furnished certain lists, copies of declarations of persons owing allegiance to that group in the organizational and legislative wings and only a few individual affidavits. Certain were affidavits filed on 3 rd, 4 th and 5 th November, 1978 by this group were also taken on record. On an application made by INC (I) for freezing the symbol calf and cow till the final decision in the matters the commission examined the lists of members supported by individual affidavits claimed by both the groups and for reasons given in its order dated the 29 th November, 1979, ordered that the Symbol Calf and Cow should be from and that the group led by Shri Devraj Ura should not continue to be described as INC till the final decision in the dispute had been rendered. By a subsequent order dated the 30 th November 1979, the group led by Shri Devraj Urs was recognished as INC (U) with a reserved symbol Charkhe pending the final decision in the matter arising out of the application of Smt. Indira Gandhi dated the claiming her group to be the INC. The parties then contested the general elections to the Lok Sabha and the Legislative assembilies of the nine States in 1980 with the names INC (I) and INC (U) with the symbols hand and cherich respectively. The INC (I) won with a thumping majority at these elections as against the very few sets won by INC (U). The counsel for INC (I), Shri O.P. Sharma, urged that subsequent events concerning both the groups of the same party would be relevant and material as it would show the overwhelming support among the electorate for INC (I) having regard to the tests laid down in the symbols order for recognition etc. However, the commission took the view that it would not be appropriate to take into account the result of subsequent elections, unless it was necessary to do so. During the proceedings the INC (I) demanded repeatedly that- (1) They should be permitted to lead oral evidence and such of the deponents who had filed individual affidavits in of INC (I):L and (2) The original lists, declarations, statements made before different authorities like Lok Sabha, Rajya Sabha, Legislative assemblies copies of which had been filed by that group before the commission, should be called for the officers from those authorities summoned as witnesses to establish the claim of the INC (U) as to its majority in the legislature wings. The commission made it clear from the beginning that it would rely only on individual affidavits filed before the commission to determine the relative strength of both the groups as such affidavits were the best place of evidence and that each side should independently established their strength. The proceedings before the commission are under the Symbols order and any documents lists, statements, declarations made before the Commission are relevant. Any lists declaration, statement before outside authorities in a different context and for a different purpose with which those authorities alone are concerned, are of no avail for the determination of the dispute under paragraph 15 of the symbols order. Any attempt to bring in those lists, declarations etc would not be justifiable as they could not have any bearing on the test of majority for the purposes of symbol disputes. For these reasons, the commission had to reject the prayer repeatedly made by INC (U) for summoning the documents in the custody of Lok Sabha, Rajya Sabha, Legislatures and also summoning officers from those authorities an witnesses. As regards leading oral evidence and cross examination of deponents who had filed individual affidavits in favour of INC (X), the INC (U) filed the first list of 16 witnesses followed later by lists covering almost the entire members of AICC, Lok Sabha, Rajya Sabha, Legislative Assemblies etc who filed individual affidavits in favour of INC (I). This number run to more than The reason for such an approach on the part of INC (U) was obvious. It was of dilatory nature. This become evident when the commission, as a test case, allowed the cross examination of 16 witnesses who had filed affidavits in favour of INC (X) and whose names appeared in the first list of witnesses furnished by INC (U). Nine witnesses produced by INC (I) were cross examined. The cross examination was directed mainly to prove that those deponents were not members of AICC or did not one allegiance to INC (I). The witnesses stuck to their statements in their affidavits, to the effect that the owned allegiance to the group led by Smt. Gandhi. ie INC (I) Only in two cases, the witnesses were confronted with affidavits of their own given in favour of INC (U) at a particular point of time. The cross examination did not otherwise establish anything substantial in support of INC (U). As the commission felt that the point whether the deponents were really NIOC members or members of Lok Sabha, Rajya Sabha, Legislative Assemblies etc or not could be established otherwise by examining an agreed list of 67

68 members of AICC and Lok Sabha,Rajya Sabha etc and that unnecessary cross examination of witnesses could be avoided wherever it was found on scrutiny or those individual affidavits on commission s records with reference to the agreed lists that they were in favour of only INC (X) and that there were no affidavits from the same members in favour of INC (U). The question of calling further witnesses and cross- examining them could arise only if these tests are satisfied. To avoid lengthy procedure of examining and cross examining witnesses on the question of their membership of undivided AICC and other organs of the party, the INC (I) accepted the lists of names of much members filed by the INC (U). A direction was issued by the commission to the secretary of the commission to prepare detailed statements based on individual affidavits showing the members of AICC, Lok Sabha, Rajya Sabha, Legislatures belonging to either of thesetwo groups, and the objections raised by either groups in regard to the acceptance of those affidavits in favour of the other group. The detailed statements prepared after due notice to both the partieswho were associated with the preparation so as to ascertain their objections. If any, were circulated to both the groups. Even at that steps the INC (U) could not show that their general objection to the claim of INC (I) was based on materials in their possession in the shape of similar affidavits from the name deponents in their favour. In fact, the INC (U) affidavits of may members in their favour among whom there were common affidavits in favour of both the groups. In such cases of common affidavits, the commission did not count the members concerned on the side of any group. In these circumstances, the unreasonable demand of INC (U) for summoning witnesses indiscriminately was rejected by the commission. The Secretary of the commission with the assistance of the counsels of both the groups, prepared detailed statements on the basis of individual affidavits filed and the agreed lists of members of AICC, Lok Sabha, Rajya Sabha, Legislative Assemblies and legislative councils of states. These statements are annexed hereto. Here, the commission would like to place on record its appreciation of the active co operation extended by the counsel, Shri O.P. Sharma, assisted by S/ Shri H.R. Bharadwaj, S.C. Maheswari and Miss Asha Jain and Miss Anil Katiyar on behalf of INC (I) and Shri V.P. Nanda on behalf of INC (U). These counsels assisted the commission in preparing various statements and scrutiny thereof. They sat with the officers of the commission for days to prepare an agreed statement which helped me to a great extent in my enquiry. Here, I would also like to dispose of the point concerning certain individual persons coming in a intervenors. The attempt in this regard was made at the very late state of the proceedings after the issue for determination had already been settled. Still, the commission granted opportunity to those persons who wanted to intervene and heard those who appeared and advanced arguments. It was made clear that these persons would be admitted as intervanors subject to the condition that they would assist the commission as impartial intervenors without aspousing the cause of any particular group and that such advice would be obtained by the commission at its own discretion. An affidavit to that affect was filed only by Shri Suresh Kumar. In the context of limited enquiry into the dispute involving only one issue which calls for determination on the basis of pura facts as disclosed in records of the case, there was no need for the commission to call upon the intervenor to assist the commission. The statements prepared by the office in agreement with both the parties were scrutinized by me in the presence of the counsels on both sides the counsels on both the sides agreed with the analysis made in the statements. The objections generally raised by the INC (U) as indicated in these statements, are as under- (i) A large number of members who have given individual affidavits in favour of INC (I) did not attend the convention held on the 1 st and 2 nd January (ii) Some of the names of supporters of INC (I) appeared in a list or declaration filed on behalf of INC (U); (iii) The convention was not called by persons duly authorised under the party constitution (iv)the members joined INC (I) only on the date of their signing those affidavits; (v) Some of the affidavits objected to were not properly sworn before the competent authority; and (vi) There were certain common affidavits in favour of both the groups. The objection that the members did not attend the convention held on 1 st and 2 nd January 1978 is not tenable. If their affidavits have shownh their allegiance to the INC (I) led by Smt. Indira Gandhi and no affidavit to the contrary had been produced, the members should be counted in favour of INC (I) whether the attended the convention or not. The material fact is whether a particular member of INC owed allegiance to any one of the two groups and that test is to be taken as satisfied if an affidavit from that member exists in favour of INC (I) and there is no other affidavit to the contrary. The objection based on the appearance of certain names of members in the lists or in the declarations filed on behalf of INC (U) cannot also be accepted as the commission had made it clear that it would rely only on individual affidavits and in the face of the individual affidavits, the lists or declarations filed in the case before the commission for the detailed reasons given earlier that both the groups had not followed the provisions of the constitution. The contention that the members signing the affidavits joined INC (I) of she date of their signing the affidavit is not tenable for the reason that in the absence of any counter- affidavit their allegiance to INC (I) is to be taken as granted. The crucial consideration is whether a proof of their allegiance in the shape of affidavits exists. In fact, the affidavits filed by INC (U) also did not relate the position as on the 2 nd January If a claim is set up by INC (U) that they had joined the other group on the date of their signing the affidavit, it is for that group to produce an affidavit to the contrary and establish the fact. They failed to do so. The commission has accepted that wherever common affidavits have been filed or any affidavit has suffered from lack of proper attestation, the members concerned would not be counted in favour of either of the two groups. For the above reasons, all the objections raised by INC (U) except those raised on the grounds of the existence of common affidavits from the same persons in favour of both the groups, affidavits filed suffering from the 68

69 defect of proper attestation, should be rejected. The analysis made in the statement would clearly indicate that the majority of members in the AICC, Lok Sabha, Rajya Sabha in a number of legislative assemblies of States and Legislative councils of states belonging to the Indian National Congress as on 2 nd January 1978 owed allegiance to the INC (I) led by Smt. Indira Gandhi. Therefore, the test of majority in these organs has been fulfilled only by that group. Apart from the above findings, it would be relevant to take into consideration the position of the two groups in the PCCs and among defeated candidates at the relevant general elections to Lok Sabha and Legislative Assemblies. The reason for this approach is that for the purpose of symbols order, not only the elected members, but also the votes secured by the general candidates are material. Similarly in the case of the earlier split of 1969, the commission took into consideration the position of the two groups in the PCCs, and this approach has been upheld by the Supreme Court. While the INC (I) filed 1300 individual affidavits of FCC members and 108 individual affidavits from defeated candidates at Lok Sabha general election of 1977 and 775 individual affidavits of defeated candidates at general elections to the legislative assemblies held prior to 1978, INC (U) did not file any single affidavit. Therefore, it should be held that the test of majority in these two categories of members has also been satisfied by the INC (I) only. Accordingly I hold that (i) The group led by Smt. Indira Gandhi as the President and known by the name Indian National Congress (I) shall be recognized for the purpose of the symbols order as the Indian National Congress, a recognized national party; (ii) The symbol hand shall continue to be the reserved symbol for the said party unless that party applies for the revival of the frozen symbol calf and cow ; and (iii) The group in the Indian National Congess led by Shri Devraj Urs and known by the name Indian National Congress (U), sjhall be de recognished. The said party shall however have the liberty to approach the commission for recognition with a different name and style and if such application is made, the same shall be considered on its merits under the symbols order. (S.L. Shakdher) Chief Election Commission of India New Delhi 23 rd July, 1981 tks vusdtj ih& ;gfd] Hkkjr fuokzpu vk;ksx dh lnl; lfefr }kjk la;qdr :i ls fnukad dks Before the Election Commission of India Coram : H.S. Brahma Election Commissioner of India Dr. S.Y. Quraishi Chief Election Commissioner of India V S Sampath Election Commissioner of India In re:petitions seeking freezing of the symbol Elephant allotted as the reserved symbol of Bahujan Samaj Party, a National Party dks fn;k x;k vkns k fueukuqlkj gs& ^^The Bahujan Samaj Party (hereinafter referred to as The BSP) in a recognized national party under the provisions of the Election Symbols (Reservation and allotment) Order, 1968 (for short Symbols Order ) having the election symbol Elephant reserved for it in all States and Union Territories except in the State of Assam. In June- July 2009, The Election Commission received three petitions raising the issue that statues of Elephant (reserved symbol of BSP) and Ms. Mayawati (President of that party and Chief Minister of Uttar Pradesh) have been installed in various places, including public parks, in Uttar Pradesh at Government expense, and praying for freezing of the symbol Elephant as the reserved symbol of the BSP. These petitions were from (i) Shri Atul Kumar Singh, Secretary General of an organization named Rashtra Nirman, (ii) Shri Kamal Kant Jaswal, Director, Common Cause, and (iii) Shri Ravi Kant and Sukumar, Advocates. (2) In their petition dated 15 th July, 2009, S/ Sh. Ravi Kant and Sukumar, Advocates, stated that the statues of Elephant and Ms. Mayawati were installed in public places in Lucknow and Noida, with the money spent from the State Exchequer. They stated that the Lucknow Development Authority and NOIDA Authority provided this information to them in reply to applications under the Right to Information Act. The reliefs claims in the petitions of S/Sh. Ravi Kant and Sukumar are as follows : (a) The elections symbol of BSP may be frozen and the party granted another symbol; (b) Ms. Mayawati may be disqualified from contesting elections as her several statues will always remain to continue to create an unequal playing ground for her opponents during elections and thus violate the very concept of free and fair elections ; (c) Sincethis jeopardizes the concept of free and fair elections, the Election Commission should call an all- party meeting to arrive at consensus on the above subject. (3) Similar relief for canceling the allotment of reserved symbol Elephant to the BSP has been claimed in the petitions of Shri Kamal Kant Jaswal and Shri Atul Kumar Singh. (4) In the petitions of Shri Ravi Kant and Shri Jaswal, they have referred to the Commission s instructions in its letters No. 437/6/INST/2008-CC & BE dated and issued before the General Election to the House of the People, 2009 directing, inter alia that Photographs and images of the political functionaries, who have deep influence on the minds of electors and many of whom are still active in public life and may even be contesting the current general election, should not be displayed in the government buildings and premises. (5) Shri Ravi Kant had earlier filed a writ petition (WP No. 266/09) before the Hon ble Supreme Court challenging the misuse of public money for construction of the said statues. The reliefs claimed in the petition before the Hon ble Supreme Court were:- (i) To issue an appropriate writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the respondent (State of Uttar Pradesh) to stop the further construction and expenditure of public funds for building and installing statues of the incumbent Chief Minister and party symbol of Bahujan Samaj Party in public land; (ii) To issue an appropriate writ, order or direction in the nature of Mandamus directing the respondent to remove the statues of the incumbent Chief Minister and the party symbol of Bahujan Samaj Party from Public land; (iii) To issue direction directing the CBI to investigate the misuse of public funds; (iv) To issue direction directing the Bahujan Samaj Party and the Chief Minister to Compensate the state exchequer for the misuse of public 69

70 money by them; (v) To issue guidelines for building of memorials and installation of Statue of National Leaders at public Places by the State. (6) The Commission vide its letter 3 rd August, 2009 asked for the comments of the BSP on the three petitions submitted before it. The BSP submitted its reply (dated 12 th August, 2009) making mainly the following submissions: (a) The petitioners (Sh. Ravi Kant and others) have also filed a Writ Petition (Civil (PIL) No. 266 of 2009 in the Supreme Court raising the same allegations. Therefore, the present petition deserves to be dismissed and in any case deserves to be deferred till the decision of the Courtwas pronounced. (b) The statues of elephants installed are not the replica of the party symbol as alleged. The election symbol of the party shows the elephant with its trunk lowered whereas the statues in question show the elephants with trunk raised in a welcome posture. (c) Statues of elephants in welcome posture are found in many public places, historical places, temples, etc. (d) The installation of statues of Ms. Mayawati are as per the will/ desire of (late) Shri Kanshi Ram, founder of the party, that statues of Ms. Mayawati should also be installed wherever his statues are erected. (e) The Indian National Congress has named many programmes, projects and institutions after their leaders that have also distorted the level playing field in the electoral arena. The party is also propagating its symbol hand. (7) The reply of the BSP was sent to the petitioners for their comments vide the Commission s letter dated In response, Shri Ravi Kant and Shri Kamal Kant Jaswal filed their rejoinders. (8) Shri Ravi Kant in his rejoinder made the following submissions : (i) Their petition before the Commission relates to the directives concerning the conduct of free and fair elections whereas their petition before the Supreme Court was against misuse of public money and violation of Article 14 of the Constitution. (ii) The reply of BSP has not addressed their main plea before the commission that alleged construction of statues violates the Commission s guidelines dated with regard to conduct of free and fair elections. (iii) The alleged constructions are not memorials because of the presence of statues of the incumbent Chief Minister and further the installation of statues of elephant in such a vast magnitude by the State Government ruled by BSP makes the intention very clear that it is for glorification and publicity of election symbol of the ruling party and its leader. (iv) The examples of historical places, temples cited in the reply of BSP were whimsical and incorrect inasmuch as neither the temples nor the historical structures had been built by public money of the tax payers. (9) Shri Kamal Kant Jaswal in his rejoinder stated as follows :(i) The image of an elephant, whether with its trunk raised or lowered, is evocative of the reserved symbol of elephant allotted to the BSP. Moreover, there are some monuments erected by the BSP s Govt. Where the statues of elephants have their trunks lowered, for example- the memorial opposite Sector16- A in Noida. (ii) The contention in his petition is that the installation of statues of the chief Minister and of the party symbol at public places and at state expense have the effect of permanently disturbing the level playing field vis-à-vis other parties. There could have been no objection had the BSP honoured the will of Late Shri Kanshi Ram by installing the statues at its own premises and on its own expense. (iii) The parallel drawn in the reply with the symbol of the Congress Party is totally misplaced. If the Congress Govt. were to erect a stand alone image of a hand, then the objection raised in his application would have applied to such an installation with equal force. (iv) He is in agreement with the view that the practice of naming state funded programmes and institutions after political personalities is highly objectionable.(10) In the meanwhile, Shri Ravi Kant also filed an I.A. before the Supreme Court in the pending writ petition in which he inter alia sought direction against the State of U.P. not to announce public opening of the statutes and not to spend public money on the glorification of the party symbol. In its interim Order dated , the Hon ble Supreme Court directed as follows : As regards the alleged installation of election symbols of Bahujan Samaj Party, the petitioners have moved the Election Commission for certain reliefs. The petitioners have also made similar relief for removal of installation of these symbols from the public places. The Election Commission would be at liberty to pass appropriate orders in the petition filed by the petitioner(s) herein at the earliest at least within a period of three months. As regards maintainability of the writ petition, list the matter after 8 weeks. (11) The Commission fixed a hearing in the matter on 11 th March, 2010; but it was postponed first to 29 th March, 2010 and then to 7 th April, 2010, at the requests of the BSP. (12) The BSP meanwhile filed a supplementary written statement on , inter alia, making the following submissions: (i) The matter has already been raised before the Supreme Court and the petitioner cannot initiate parallel proceedings before another forum. (ii) The construction of statues is action taken by the State Government for implementing the decision of the State Legislature. Political party cannot be penalized for actions of the Government. (iii) The earlier Government under the INC, and the coalition Govt. of BJP, BSP had also built statues of elephants in UP. (iv) The jurisdiction of the Commission to Superintend, direct and control elections becomes operative during the elections only and as such the Commission has nothing to do with the day to day functioning of the government in a state during non- election period. (13) The Commission heard the matter on as scheduled. Shri Ravi Kant and Shri Jaswal, the petitioners appeared in person. The Respondent (Bahujan Samaj Party) was represented by Shri Satish Cahndra Mishra. Both the petitioners and the respondent reiterated their submissions made earlier.(14) In the meantime, in order to get a more comprehensive and complete picture the Commission addressed the State Govt. of Uttar Pradesh on 3 rd March, 2010 to furnish the following details: (i) In how many parks/ public place (with details of names, location of parks etc.) statues of elephant and statues of Ms. Mayawati have been erected/ installed as alleged in the application. (ii) How many such statues have been constructed in each public place/ park. (iii) The approximate cost of erection/ installation of each statue. (iv) Photographs and video 70

71 recordings of such statues. (15) It was requested that the above information may be furnished to the Commission by the State Government by 8 th March, Initially, the State Government vide its letter dated 5 th March, 2010, informed that the information was being collected from the department concerned but later on the state Government vide its letters dated 19 th March, 2010 and 3 rd April, 2010, refused to furnish the information asked for on the ground that the Commission has no jurisdiction to seek such information either under the Constitution or under the Representation of the People Act, More details of correspondence on this subject with the State Government have been given hereinafter in a subsequent portion of this Order. (16) Being dissatisfied with the stand of the State Government of Uttar Pradesh in relation to the jurisdiction of the Commission in the matter, and being of the view that the desired information was needed for passing appropriate order in the petitions before it, the Commission filed an Application before the Supreme Court seeking direction to the Govt. of Uttar Pradesh to supply the information called by the Commission. The Commission also sought extension of time- limit for passing the Order on the petitions before the Commission. (17) The Supreme Court in its order dated 9 th July, 2010 directed as under Pursuant to order dated 22 nd February, 2010, we make it clear that the Election Commission will give its decision on the Preliminary point concerning maintainability of the complaint dated 15 th July, 2009, relating to symbols and statues. We are informed that the matter has been argued threadbare on the aspect of maintainability on 7 th April, If, on the question of maintainability, the Election Commission wants further hearing, notice may be given. However, the decision shall be given by the Election Commission within a period of three months. Place the writ petition on receipt of the decision of the Election Commission. (18) Thereupon, the Commission asked the petitioners and the respondent (Bahujan Samaj Party) vide its letter dated 2 nd August, 2010 to submit further documents, if any, on the question f maintainability of the petitions by 17tyh August, 2010.Shri Shail Kumar Dwivedi, on behalf of the BSP and Shri Ravi Kant, the petitioner furnished their replies more or less reiterating the submissions made earlier by them. (19) The Commission then further heard the matter on 24 th September, Shri Ravi Kant and Shri Kamal Kant Jaswal, the petitioners appeared in person. On behalf of the BSP, Shri Satish Chandra Mishra, Senior Advocate, appeared along with Shri Shail Kumar Dwivedi Advocate, Shri Ambeth Rajan, Shri Sasi, Shri Parthiban and Shri Ravi Saini. (20) Shri Ravi Kant submitted that the BSP had admitted the fact of construction of statues of Ms. Mayawati and statues of elephants, at the expense of public exchequer. He stated that the statues of elephants installed in temples are symbolic, whereas the intention behind installing large number of statues of elephants in the present case in clearly to draw political mileage for the Party. According to him, it is unheard of that the State Government installs statues of a living political leader, its incumbent Chief Minister, at the expense of the public exchequer, whereby ruling party gets undue political advantage out of this. (21) The petitioner Sh. Ravi Kant also submitted photographs of two statues of Ms. Mayawati installed in Gautam Budh University in Greater Noida and reiterated his submission that the permanent statues of elephant being installed would be violation of model code of conduct at the time of election which is sufficient ground to freeze the symbol elephant allotted to the BSP. In support of his contention that the petition is maintainable he made the following further submissions before the Commissions: (i) With the commencement of bye- election from 83 Malihabad (SC) assembly constituency in the State of Uttar Pradesh on 16 th July, 2010, the Model Code of conduct was in operation from to in the district Luchnow. The statues will result in violation of the Model Code of Conduct for all time to come at the time of elections. (ii) The alleged construction of statues of party symbol and incumbent Chief Minister is an offence of a new kind which has no mention in the Representation of the People, Act, 1951 and Symbols order and such new surprise situations can be dealt with by the Commission in exercise of its inherent powers under Article 324, as held by the Supreme Courtof India in M.S. Gill Vs Chief Election Commissioner (AIR 1978 Supreme Court 851) and A.C. Jose V Sivan Pillai (AIR 1984 SC 921). (iii) If such massive structures and statues benefiting a single political party in power in a state is allowed by the Election Commission it will open the gates for huge memorials and millions of statues of politicians and election symbols to be built across the country with thousand of crores of public funds being spent. The ramifications of allowing such statues and memorials of the incumbent Chief Minister is dangerous for the democracy and conduct of free and fair elections. (iv) The Commission should use its plenary powers in Article 324 (1) in the instant case before it. (22) Shri Jaswal submitted that installation of permanent statues of the living leader of the BSP and statues of elephant, the reserved election symbol of the party, in public places was a clear violation of the Commission s instructions in its circular letter No. 437/6/INST/2008-CC & BE, dated , prohibiting display of pictures of political leaders in government premises during election period. He stated that installing of these statues amounted to misuse of governmental authority that would permanently disturb level playing field infavour of the BSP and its candidates Vis-A Vis other Parties and Candidates. Shri Jaswal submitted that if the statues had been installed at private places on private expense, it would not have been objectionable; but, the present case was just the opposite. Regarding the contention made by the BSP in its reply about elephant statue having been built long back in the Hathi Park in Lucknow, Shri Jaswal s ubmitted that elephant was not election symbol at that point of time. Winding up his arguments, Shri Jaswal submitted that the emerging trend of misusing public money for political game has to be dealt with firmly. Shri Jaswal added that he would welcome any action to curb the naming the schemes after political leaders. (23) Shri Satish Chandra Mishra, 71

72 appearing for the BSP, made the following submissions, mainly reiterating his earlier submissions in his reply dated 12 th August, 2009 and supplementary reply dated 29 th March, 2010: (1) Shri Ravi Kant filed a writ petition before the Supreme Court raising the issue of the statues, in June, In July, 2009 he filed the petition before the commission on the same issue. Multi- forum proceedings on connected issues amount to forum- hunting and is not permissible. The petition before the Commission should, therefore be disposed of an not maintainable. (ii) The relief claimed for disqualification of Ms. Mayawati from contesting election is totally frivolous. The Commission has to function within the limits of the powers vested in it under the law. There is no provision of law enabling the Commission to disqualify a person on the ground given in the petition of Shri RaviKant. (iii) The instructions contained in the Commission s circular letter no. 437/6/INST/2008-CC & BE dated , are not applicable at this point of time when there is no election. Alleged violation of the instructions cannot create rights and obligations unknown to the election law. (iv) Model code of conduct applies only during the period of election. (v) The elephant has special significance and place in the Indian tradition and history. The Commission s decision allotting the symbol to the BSP was a conscious decision fully knowing the significance of elephant symbol. (vi) The statue of elephant is found in several public places and buildings including the parliament House. Even the Indian currency notes have the elephant printed on it. (vii) The statues in question are not the replica, as alleged, of the BSP symbol. The trunk of the elephants in the statues is raised in welcome posture whereas the trunk of the election symbol elephant is lowered. The election symbol of BSP has nothing to do with the statues of elephants installed by the government or its agencies. (viii) The petitions before the commission do not make out any case of violation of the Model Code of Conduct or any lawful direction of the Commission at a time when election was notified in the State. Hence, the petitions are not maintainable. There is no direction or order issued by the Commission regarding construction of statues of political leaders or replica of a political party s election symbol, which may be taken as having been violated in this case. (xi) There are several government schemes and programmes named after leaders of Indian National Congress which would also influence the electors. (x) No violation of any statutory or fundamental rights of the petitioners have been pleaded in the complaints. (xi) The statues, monuments are just symbolic and the electorate is not influenced in any manner by such statues. The result of the Lok Sabha election in 2009 from Lucknow parliamentary Constituency which went against the BSP disproves the claim of petitioners that the statue of elephants, and the Chief Minister or any other leader would be creating an uneven ground for other candidates. (xiii) There was no cause of action to file the complaint. Hence, the complaint were liable to be rejected under Order 7 Rule 11 CPC read with Section 87 of the Representation of the People Act. Illusory cause of action cannot be taken cognizance of. (xiv) The Commission has taken the view that in matters related to governmental issues, during no election period, the commission has no jurisdiction to interfere, as is evedent from its letters dated 18 th March, 2010 and 5 th April, 2010 to Shri Manoj Agnihotiri and Shri Surya Prakash raising the issue of naming of various government schemes and programmes after the political leaders. (xv) The decision to install the statues of elephants and statues of Ms. Mayawati was taken by the State Legislature to honour the wish of the electorate, and the State Government implemented this decision. The budget for installation of these statues has been approved by the State Legislature. The Government and olitical party are two different entities. The BSP as a political party had no role to play in installing the statues referred to in the petitions. The Commission or Court has no power of judicial review or scrutiny of expenditure incurred by the Government pursuant to Appropriation Act passed by the State Legislature. (xvi) The Commission will not have jurisdiction in exercise of its power under Article 324 of the Constitution of India to go into the issue as to whether action of the Government is not wise or that the extent of expenditure is not for the good of the State. All such questions must be debated and decided in the legislature and not before the election commission. (24) On conclusion of the hearing the Commission permitted the petitioners and the BSP to submit written synopsis of their arguments, if they so desired, within one week. Only the BSP filed its written synopsis. (25) The question that needs to be determined first by the Commission in terms of the Hon ble Supreme Court s direction dated 9 th July 2010, is whether the petition dated 15 th July, 2009 of Shri Ravi Kant and others seeking, inter alia, freezing of the symbol elephant of BSP and allotting another symbol on the grounds mentioned therein is maintainable before the Commission. (26) The Commission has considered the contentions of the petitioners and the submissions made on behalf of the BSP. For determining the question of maintainability of the abovementioned petition of Shri Ravi Kant and others and the petitions of Shri Kamal Kant Jaswal and others, the Commission has to look into the reliefs sought and prayers made therein. (27) One of the reliefs prayed for by Shri Ravi Kant in his petition is that Ms. Mayawati may be disqualified from contesting elections for the alleged misused of Govt. funds for installing her statues, in addition to his prayer for freezing the election symbol elephant of the BSP. As regards this prayer for disqualification of Ms. Mayawati it is to be noted that grounds for disqualification for being chosen as, and for being, a Member of Parliament and State Legislature have been expressly laid down in the Constitution (Articles 102 and 191) and in the Representation of the People Act, 1951 (Sections 8, 8A, 9, 9A, 10 and 10A). The grounds pleaded in the petition of Shri Ravi Kant seeking disqualification of Ms. Mayawati do not within the ambit of any of the disqualifications laid down in the law. The Commission cannot add or lay down any new grounds for disqualification. Therefore the prayer for disqualification of Ms. Mayawati for the reasons given in the petition is not tenable, and the same has to be rejected. (28) Another 72

73 relief prayed for is that the statues of elephant and Ms. Mayawati jeopardize the concept of free and fair elections and the Commission should call an all party meeting to arrive at a consensus on the subject. Hardly anything needs to be said with regard to this prayer, as the Commission itself would be able to take appropriate decision if it feels that the concept of free and fair elections has been jeopardized by the above statues and there is no need to call for an all party meeting for arriving at any consensus, as prayed for. (29) The only other prayer made by the petitioners is that the symbol elephant of BSP may be frozen and another symbol may be allotted to the party. For considering this prayer, what needs to be seen is whether the petitioners have made out a case justifying the Commission s intervention. The reference to freezing here obviously means withdrawing the symbol elephant from the BSP and allotting an alternative symbol to the party, so that the party does not get an undue advantage of its symbol which is stated to have been propagated at the State cost. As has been held by the Hon ble Supreme Court in the case of Subramanian Swamy Vs. Election Commission of India 2008 (14) SCC 318 symbols are reserved for political parties on their recognition as National or State parties. Recognition of political parties as National or State Parties and allotment and reservation of election symbols to them is governed by the provisions of the Election Symbols (Reservation and Allotment) Order, 1968, as amended from time to time. The BSP, as already stated, is presently a recognized National Party under the said Symbols order, and the symbol elephant is reserved for it in all States and UTs except in Assam. Allotment and reservation of symbol to a recognized political party or withdrawal of such allotment or reservation has to be traceable to specific provisions under the said symbols order. Grant of recognition to a party which entitles it to a reserved symbol under the Symbols order is dependent on the poll performance of the party in terms of the percentage of votes polled and the number of seats won as per the criteria laid down in paragraphs-6a and 6Bof the symbols order. One contingency that can result in withdrawal of recognition and the consequent withdrawal of the reserved symbol is the failure of the party to come up with the poll performance as required under the said paragraphs. It is nobody s case that the BSP has failed in its poll performance to measure upto the prescribed standards for continued recognition as a National Party. (30) The other provision dealing with withdrawal or suspension of recognition and consequent withdrawal of reserved symbol in the case of a recognized political party is laid down in paragraph 16 A of the symbols order. The said paragraph is reproduced below for case of reference 16A. Power of Commission to suspend or withdraw recognition of a recognized political party for its failure to observe Model Code of Conduct or follow lawful directions and instructions of the Commission Notwithstanding anything in this order, if the Commission is satisfied on information in its possession that a political party, recognized either as a National Party or as a State Party under the provisions of this Order, has failed or has refused or is refusing or has shown or is showing defiance by its conduct or otherwise (a) to observe the provisions of the Model Code of Conduct for Guidance of Political Parties and Candidates as issued by the Commission in January, 1991 or as amended by it from time to time, or (b) to follow or carry out the lawful directions and instructions of the Commission given from time to time with a view to furthering the conduct of free, fair and peaceful elections or safeguarding the interests of the general public and the electorate in particular, the Commission may, after taking into account all the available facts and circumstances of the case and after giving the party reasonable opportunity of showing cause in relation to the action proposed to be taken against it, either suspend, subject to such terms as the Commission may deem appropriate or withdraw the recognition of such party as the National Party or as the case may be the State Party. (31) Thus, the factors that can lead to withdrawal or suspension of recognition and consequent withdrawal or freezing of the symbol of a recognized party under the Symbols order are attributable either to the poll performance of the Party or its conduct and actions amounting to violations of the Model Code of Conduct or any lawful directions or instructions issued by the Commission. As already noted above, it is no one s case that the BSP has failed to fulfill the conditions laid down in paras 6A or 6B of the symbols order for its continued recognition as a National Party. In so far as the question of violation of any lawful direction or instruction of the Commission is concerned, the petitioners have not pointed out any direction or instruction of the Commission which the BSP is alleged to have violated within the meaning of para 16 A of the symbols order. (32) The question that now remains to be considered is whether any provision of the Model Code of Conduct has been violated in the erection and installation of statues of elephant and Ms. Mayawati. It is well settled that the Model Code of Conduct comes into play when the Election Commission announces any schedule for an election and it ceases to be effective on the completion of election by the declaration of the result. Shri Ravi Kant took the plea at the hearing on 14 th September, 2010 that they had filed the petition under reference before the Commission on 15 th July, 2009 and that the Commission announced certain bye- elections, including a bye election from 83- Malihabad Assembly constituency in Lucknow district, on 16 th July, He thus contended that their petition should be deemed to have been filed before the Commission when the Model Code of Conduct was in force. This is obviously an after thought, as this plea was not taken either in their original petition or in any of their rejoinders and it was only on 24 th September, 2010 that such a plea was advanced for the first time by Shri Ravi Kant. In any event, it is not the case of the petitioners that the erection or installation of statues of elephant and Ms. Mayawati commenced after 16 th July, 2009 when the Model Code of Conduct became effective in relation to the abovementioned bye election. In their petition dated 15 th July, 2009 itself, the petitioners have given some instances of certain statues having already been installed in Lucknow and Noida. (33) Notwithstanding the 73

74 above, the question is whether the Model Code of Conduct can be said to be attracted in the matter of erection and installation of the abovementioned statues of elephant and Ms. Mayawati. The symbol elephant has been allotted to, and reserved for, the BSP by the Commission under the provisions of the symbols order. Every party has the right to propagate its symbol by erection of statues of the symbol and also of its leaders. But is hardly needs to be stressed that such propagation of the party s symbol should be undertaken by the party by spending its own funds and resources and should not undertake such propagation by misusing its official position being the ruling party in the State, and using public funds for the purpose. The Model code of conduct provides, inter alia that The Party in power whether at the Centre or in the State or States concerned, shall ensure that no cause is given for any complaint that it has used its official position for the purposes of its election campaign. Propagating a party s symbol is the main object of the party s election campaign. But if a party, whether ruling or in the opposition by misusing public funds for its own partisan ends, erects or installs statues of its party symbol, even during non election period, the party cannot a bsolve itself of the accusation that it has acted in beach of salutary principles underlying the objects of the Model Code of Conduct- may be not in letter but undoubtedly in spirit. (34)The petitions of Shri Ravi Kant and others are mainly based on two communications, dated 28 th March, 2009 and 1 st April, 2009 of the Commission. In the context of the general election to the Lok Sabha 2009, the Commission by its letter dated 28 th March 2009 instructed that the photographs and images of the political functionaries, who have deep influence on the minds of electors and many of whom are still active in public life and may even be contesting the current general elections, should not be displayed in the government buildings and premises as that would have the effect of disturbing the level playing field vis-à-vis political functionaries of other parties and candidates. Subsequently the Commission vide its letter dated 01 st April 2009 clarified that while the photographs of Prime Minister Chief Minister, Ministers and other political functionaries should not be displayed, the above instruction, however, is not applicable with regard to the images of national leaders poets, and prominent historical personalities of the past, and the President of India and the Governors. If it is felt that even the display of photographs of leaders of a political party which go on changing from time to time in the confines of government officers, etc can vitiate the level playing field, a permanent statute of a living leader and the symbol of the party will undoubtedly result in the said vitiation of the level playing field. (35) Further, if the display of a photograph inside an office room can have the effect of vitiating the level field the installation of a permanent statute which is visible at all times to every person passing through that public place can be said to have more vitiating effect on the mind of the electorate. It is not in dispute that all the statues under reference have been erected and installed at the public places which are visited and frequented by the public at large more or less on daily basis. The photographs of leaders may be removed during the election period, but what would happen to such statues of symbols and leaders permanently erected and installed at the public places which are visited and frequented by the public at large more or less on daily basis. The photographs of leaders may be removed during the election period, but what would happen to such statues of symbols and leaders permanently erected and installed in public places during the election period. This may amount to disturbing the level playing field almost on daily basis and not merely during the election period. (36) To counter the above allegations the plea of the party is that the statues of elephant are not the replica of the party s symbol elephant as the statues of elephant installed have their trunks raised upwards in welcome posture whereas the trunk of elephant in the party s symbol is lowered downwards. This plea hardly carries any weight. When a common man sees the statue of an elephant, he sees an elephant in it and that would remind him of the symbol elephant of BSP. The trunk of elephant being raised upwards or lowered downwards would hardly be a distinguishing feature in the mind of a common elector. The slogans coined by the BSP soliciting votes for it in its election compaign are : Mohar Lagao Haathi Par Button Dabao Haathi Par. In these slogans there is no appeal that the vote should be cast for elephant with the trunk lowered the appeal simplicitor is to vote for the symbol elephant. Here it may also be relevant to point out that when the question of reservation of symbol for the BSP on all India basis arose on its gaining the status of National Party in 1996, the party insisted for reservation of the symbol elephant and did not agree for any modification by addition of Howda or Mahout as the party pleaded that it is identified with the symbol elephant simplicitor. Will there be no objection to the allotment of a symbol elephant with trunk raised in welcome posture to some other party if so asked for by any other political party, on the ground that the two symbols are different or distinct from each other? (37) But the undisputed fact is that the statues in question have been installed by the State Government at the State expense. This is accepted both by the petitioners and by the BSP. The question for determination now boils down to is whether this act of the State Government should invite action against the BSP, as sought in the petitions. In the written and oral submissions made on behalf of the BSP, the main plank of the defence of BSP is that the statues of elephant and leaders of BSP have been erected by the State Government and not by the party. In the erection of such statues, the State Government has acted with the specific sanction of the State Legislature and the expenditure on these statues has been duly approved by the State Legislature by passing valid appropriation Acts. The BSP contends that the Commission cannot, therefore, go into the question of installation of these statues, and the expenditure incurred thereon, by the State Government. Reliance in support of the above contention has been placed on the decisions of the Hon ble Supreme Court in Ram Jawaya Kapoor Vs State of Punjab [1955 (2) SCR 225] and Bhim Singh Vs Union of India 2010 (5) SCC 538 to the effect that Judicial interference is permissible when the action of the 74

75 government is unconstitutional and not when such action is not wise or that the extent of expenditure is not for the good of the State. We are of the view that all such questions must be debated and decided in the legislature and not in court. It was contended that when even the Apex Court of the land cannot go into the propriety or otherwise of any government action or expenditure a fortiori, the commission cannot sit in judgment over the decisions taken by the State Legislature and the Executive act performed by the State Government in pursuance of such decisions of the State Legislature. (38) The Commission sees quite a force in the above contention of the BSP and it cannot be lightly brushed aside. The question whether the BSP has misused its position as the ruling party in getting the statutes of Ms. Mayawati and elephant installed with public funds during the non election period, is not for the Commission to go into. It is common knowledge that Shri Ravi Kant and several others have already approached the Hon ble Supreme Court and Hon ble Allahabad High Court with their grievances to that effect. The Hon ble Courtsare examining those matters and decisions rendered by them would be binding on all authorities. (39) It will be observed from the above that the facts regarding construction of the statues by the State Government are not in any dispute. However, the extent of the constructions is not clear although Shri Ravi Kant submitted some details based on the information he was able to obtain from the State Government under the RTI Act. As mentioned earlier, the Commission desired to get the correct and complete picture so as to see that appropriate orders could be passed or appropriate measures taken, if any, to redress the grievance of the petitioners. With that end in view, the Commission wrote to the State Government of Uttar Pradesh to furnish details regarding the number of statues installed in various places in the State on government expense, and the total expenditure incurred in connection therewith. In its first letter dated 3 rd March 2010, to the State Government, while referring to the petitions filed before the Commission, the Commission requested the State Government to furnish by 8 th March, 2010 the above information, including the photographs and video- recording of such statues. Initially the State Government vide its letter dated 5 th March 2010 informed that the information was being collected from the departments concerned, and that they needed 15 days more time to furnish the information. The commission then informed the State Govt. that the information be furnished by 23 rd March Later the State Govt. vide their letter dated 19 th March 2010 instead of furnishing the information asked for, stated that no exact replica of the design of election symbol Elephant had been constructed by the Govt. from their budget as mentioned in the complaint. In so far as construction of statues of Ms. Mayawati was concerned, the letter stated that the reference to the statues of Ms Mayawati was made only as a passing statement in the complaint of Shri Ravi Kant and no specific complaint was madeon that ground. The commission vide itsletter dated 23 rd March, 2010 again wrote to the State Govt. to furnish by 3 rd April 2010 factual information regarding the number of all statues of elephants and Ms Mayawati installed at public/ private places from Govt. funds between 2007 and 2010 and photographs and video recordings of such statues. However, the State Government this time took the position that the Commission had no jurisdiction to seek such information. The Chief secretary to the State Government, in his letter dated 3 rd April 2010 state that neither in Article 324 of the Constitution nor in the Representation of the People Act, 1951 is there an provision empowering the Commission to seek such information from the State Govt. curiously the issue of jurisdiction was raised after the State government has initially sought additional time to furnish the desired information/ video recordings. It is apparent that the State Govt. Did not wish to give details of the matter, for reasons known to it. It is incongruous that a constitutional authority should choose to deny basic factual information of the nature sought in the present case, which can be accessed even by a common citizen under the right to information act, to another constitutional authority to enable the latter to have the benefit of full and correct factual information to decide petitions filed before it. The commission wrote back to the State Government on 21 st April 2010 that the commission had been expressly given liberty by the Hon ble Supreme Court to pass appropriate orders in the petitions filed by the petitioners at the earliest and it was in the context of the above direction of the Apex Court that the Commission considered it necessary and relevant to obtain factual information from the State Government on the issues raised in the petitions before it for passing appropriate orders thereon. The facts on which information has been sought were the facts within the special knowledge of the State Government and it was but fair and in accordance with the principles of natural justice that the requisite information should have been given by the State Government. In the Commission s view, instead of assisting the Commission in arriving at the just and fair conclusion and enabling it to pass appropriate orders on the basis of all relevant facts as directed by the Hon ble Supreme Court, the State Government raised the issue of the Commission s jurisdiction and refused to furnish the basic factual information sought. The Commission wrote to the State Government expressing its disagreement with the State Government s view with regard to the Commission\s jurisdiction and stated that the stand taken by the State Government was thwarting the just and fair process of ascertaining the fact by the Commission for passing appropriate orders as directed by the Hon ble Supreme Court. Yet, the state Government did not give any information as asked for by the Commission. (40) Pertinent to mention here that the BSP, in its supplementary written statement filed on also took a similar stand that there was no legal obligation on the State Govt. to furnish information to the Election Commission regarding the installation of statues. This was inconsistent with the stand taken by the party that the State Govt. and political party are different entities and by raising this objection, the party apparently obliterated any distinction between the government and the party. (41) The BSP has contended that the jurisdiction of the Commission to superintend, 75

76 direct and control elections becomes operative during the elections only and it has nothing to do with the dayto-day functioning of the government in a State during non election period. The Commission is a little surprised at the above contention of the BSP. Under Article 324 of the Constitution, the Commission has been vested with the superintendence, direction and control of, inter alia, preparation of electoral rolls and conduct of elections to both Houses of Parliament and State Legislatures. The activities relating to above functions of the Commission under the Constitution go on throughout the year and are not confined only to the election period, as contended by the BSP. For instance, the electoral rolls have to be revised before the elections and remain in the state of continuous updation throughout the year even during non election period. Polling stations are identified and lists thereof are revised from time to time, not during the election period alone, but much before the actual process of elections. Again the polling staff has to be identified and trained during the non- election period. Election materials have to be procered and the electronic voting machines checked for their fool proof functioning, well before the elections. Election records have to be safely preserved after the elections are over. It is the State machinery which is involved in all these day-to-day activities. Further, it is common knowledge that election symbols are allotted to, and reserved for, recognized political parties during the non election period. All disputes relating to such allotment and reservation of election symbols of recognized political parties which the Commission has to adjudicate under the symbols order also arise substantially during the non election period. Thus, for adjudicating a dispute relating to an election symbol of a party, it is not a condition precedent that the election process should be on and the model code of conduct in force. (42) Be that as it may, the positionemerging from the facts and circumstances narrated above it that the Commission is in the dark as to the places where the statues, particularly of the party s symbol elephant, have been installed and what is the numberof such statues installed in different places in Uttar Pradesh. The petitioners have stated that some statues of elephant and Ms Mayawati have been installed in Lucknow and Noida. But at the last hearing on 24 th September, 2010, Shri Ravi Kant alleged that some such statues have been further installed in Gautam Budh Nagar District also. As mentioned above, the State government has refused to furnish even the basic information as to where and how many of these statues have been erected and installed. In fact, the Commission even does not know whether all the elephant statues which have been installed with public funds have their trunks raised in welcome posture, as averred by BSP, or lowered downwards. Shri Kamal Kant Jaswal pointed out that some statues installed in some part of Noida have even their trunks loweed downwards as in BSP s symbol elephant. Thus on the facts available to the Commission and the records adduced by the parties the Commission is not in a position to guage the impact of the above statues, and the extent of such impact, on the minds of the electros. It has to be borne in mind that the BSP is a National party and the symbol elephant is reserved for it in the whole of the country, except Assam. Before taking any decision with regard to the withdrawal of the above symbol from the party, as prayed for by the petitioners, the Commission has to carefully weigh the implications which such withdrawal of symbol may have and cause confusion in the minds of millions of electors apart from members, supporters and workers of the party, across the country, who identify the party with its symbol elephant on account of some action taken by one of the State Governments. (43) In view of the above and taking into account the totality of the facts and circumstances available to the commission, the relief prayed for by Shri Ravi Kant and others in their petitions under reference are not capable of being granted on the grounds urged therein and thus the said petitions are not maintainable. (44) However, at the time of elections the Commission would, no doubt, take appropriate steps and measures to see that the statutes of Ms. Mayawati and BSP s symbol elephant s do not disturb the level playing field and give undue advantage to BSP vis-à-vis other political parties. (45) These steps and measures would, however, be subject to any directions that may be passed by the Hon ble Supreme Court or Hon ble Allahabad High Court in the matters pending before them. Shri H.S. Brahma Election Commissioner of India, Dr. S.Y. Quraishi Chief Election Commissioner of India, Shri V S Sampath Election Commissioner of India New Delhi 11 th October, 2010 ¼uksV& mijksdr i= vusdtj ih &11 ij fy[kk x;k ½ 251 ;gfd] ekuuh; lokszpp U;k;ky; dh flfoy vihy ua 37@1992 Abhiram Singh Vs C.D. Commachen (Dead) by Lrs & others With Civil Appeal No of 1995 Narayan Singh Vs Sunder Lal Patwa & ors ekuuh; U;k;ewfrZ Shri Madan B. Lokur, J. (1) The foundation for this reference relating to the interpretation of Section 123 (3) of the Representation of the People Act, 1951 to a Bench of Seven Judges has its origins in three decisions of this Court. (2) In Abhiram Singh Vs C.D. Commachan the election in 1990 of Abhiram Singhto the No. 40, Santa Cruz Legislative Assembly Constituency for the Maharashtra State Assembly was successfully challenged by Commachen in the Bombay High Court. While hearing the appeal against the decision of the Bombay High Court, a Bench of three learned judges expressed the view that the content, scope and what constitutes a corrupt practice under sub- sections (3) or (3A) of section 123 of the Representation of the people Act, 1951 (for short, the act) needs to be clearly and authoritatively laid down to avoid a miscarriage of justice in interpreting corrupt practice. The Bench was of opinion that the appeal requires to be heard and decided by a larger Bench of five judges of this Court on three specific questions of law. (3) In Narayan Singh Vs. Sunder Lal Patwa the election of Sunderlal Patwa from the Bhojpur constituency no. 245 in Madhya Pradesh to the Legislative Assembly in 1993 was under challenge on the ground of a corrupt practice in that the returned candidate had allegedly made a systematic appeal on the 76

77 ground of religion in violation of Section 123 (3) of the Act. The election petition was dismissed. In appeal before this Court, the Constitution Bench noticed an anomalous situation arising out of an amendment to section 123 (3) of the Act in 1961inasmuch as it appeared that a corrupt practice for the ^^uksv&fuokzpu vk;ksx Hkkjr ljdkj }kjk lwpuk ds vf/kdkj ds rgr nh xbz lwpuk esa ist ua- 6 ls ist ua- 114 rd ds ist tkudkjh esa ugha fn;s x;s gs tcfd fuokzpu vk;ksx dh Mkyh xbz ist la[;k tks 267 tks ist ua- 5 ij gs,oa 268 ist ua- 115 ij gs bl izdkj vk;ksx }kjk 108 istksa dh udy izkfkhz dks iznku ugha dh xbz ftl dkj.k ls mijksdr nlrkostksa esa D;k fy[kk Fkk fy[kus esa vlefkz gwwa ks k tkudkjh iqu% izkjahk^^ 976 I would like to add one more, as the tenth, Once this Court has addressed an issue on a substantial question of law as to the structure of the constitution and has laid down the law, a request for revisit shall not be welcomed unless it is shown that the structural interpretation is palpably erroneous Justice A.K. Goel formulated the principle in the following terms Parameters for determining as to when earlier binding decisions ought to be reopened have been repeatedly laid down by this Court. The settled principle is that court should not, except when it is demonstrated beyond all reasonable doubts that its previous ruling given after due deliberation and full hearing was erroneous, revisit earlier decisions so that the law remains certain, [Gannon Dunkerley and Co. V. State of Rajasthan, (1963) 1 SCC 364, paras 28 to 31] In exceptional circumstances or under new set of conditions in the light of new ideas, earlier view, if considered mistaken, can be reversed. While march of law continues and new systems can be developed whenever needed, it can be done only if earlier systems are considered unworkable. 50. Applying these parameters no case has been made out to take a view at variance with the settled legal position that the expression his in section 123 (3) must mean the religion, race, community or language of the candidate in whose favour an appeal to cast a vote is made or that of another candidate against whom there is an appeal to refrain from voting on the ground of the religion, race, caste, community or language of that candidate. 51.The Representation of the People Act, 1951 has undergone several parliamentary amendments. Parliament would be aware of the interpretation which has been placed by this Court on the provisions of Section 123 (3). Despite this, the provision has remained untouched though several others have undergone a change. In the meantime, elections have been held successfully, governments have changed and majorities have been altered in the house of Indian democracy. There is merit in ensuring a continuity of judicial precedent. The interpretation which has earlier been placed on Section 123 (3) is correct and certainly does not suffer from manifest error. Nor has it been productive of public mischief. No form of government is perfect. The actual unfolding of democrary and the working of a democratic constitution may suffer from imperfections. But these imperfections cannot be attended to by an exercise of judicial redrafting of a legislative provision. Hence, we hold that there is no necessity for this Court to take a view at variance with what has been laid down. The his in section 123 (3) does not refer to the religion, race, caste, community or language of the voter. His is to be read as referring to the religion, race, caste, community or language of the candidate in whose favour a vote is sought or that of another candidate against whom there is an appeal to refrain from voting. (Adarsh Kumar Goel), (Uday Umesh Lalit), (Dr. D Y Chandrachud) New Delhi January 02, 2017 ¼uksV& mijksdr i= vusdtj ih &207& ij fy[kk x;k ½ 252- ;gfd] Jh ds-,q- foyýsm izhafliy lsøsvjh Hkkjr fuokzpu vk;ksx }kjk fnukad dks lhkh jktuhfrd ikfvz;ksa ds v/;{k lfpo dks funsz k tkjh fd;k x;k i=&^^ Judgment dated of the Hon ble Supreme Court in C.A Nos. 37 of 1992 and C.A. No of 1995 (Abhiram Singh Vs C.D. Commachen & others) Seeking votes in the name of religion, caste etc. I am directed to invite your attention to the judgment of the Constitution Bench of seven Judges in C A No.s 37 of 1992 and C.A. No of 1995 (Abhiram Singh Vs C.D. Commachen & others) on the issue of use of religion, caste, etc in election campaign. By the majority judgment, the Apex Court has held that any appeal to vote or to refrain from voting for a candidate on the ground of religion, caste, race, community or language of the candidate, election agent, any person making the appeal with the consent of the candidate or on the ground of the religion, caste etc. of the electors would amount to corrupt practice. (2) The relevant extracts from the judgment are quoted below for the information and reference of your party: 23. The upshot of the above discussion clearly is that under the constitutional scheme mixing religion with State Power is not permissible while freedom to practice profess and propagate religion of one s choice is guaranteed. The State being secular in character will not identify itself with any one of the religions or religious denominations. This necessarily implies that religion will not play any role in the governance of the country which must at all times be secular in nature. The elections to the State legislature or to the Parliament or for that matter or any other body in the State is a secular exercise just as the functions of the elected representatives must be secular in both outlook and practice. Suffice it to say that the Constitutional ethos forbids mixing of religions or religious considerations with the secular functions of the State (28) There is thus ample authority for the proposition that while interpreting a legislative provision, the Courts must remain alive to the constitutional provisions and ethos and that interpretations that are in tune with such provisions and ethos ought to be preferred over others. Applying that principle to the case at hand, an interpretation that will have the effect of removing the religion or religious considerations from the secular character of the State or state activity ought to be preferred over an interpretation which may allow such considerations to enter, effect or influence such activities. Electoral processes are doubtless secular activities of the State. Religion can have no place in such activities for religion is a matter personal to the individual with which neither the State nor any other individual has anything to do. The relationship 77

78 between man and God and the means which humans adopt to connect with the almighty are matters of individual preferences and choices. The state is under an obligation to allow complete freedom for practicing, professing and propagating religious faith to which a citizen belongs in terms of Article 25 of the Constitution of India but the freedom so guaranteed has nothing to do with secular activities which the State undertakes. The State can and indeed has in terms of Section 123 (3) forbidden interference of religions and religious beliefs with secular activity of elections to legislative bodies. To sum up [Emphasis supplied] (29)An appeal in the name of religion, race, caste, community or language is impermissible under the Representation of People Act 1951 and would constitute a corrupt practice sufficient to annual the election in which such an appeal was made regardless whether the appeal was in the name of the candidate s religion or the religion of the election agent or that of the opponent or that of the voter s. The sum total of section 123 (3) even after amendment is that an appeal in the name of religion, race, caste, community or language is forbidden even when the appeal may not be in the name of the religion, race, caste, community or language of the candidate for whom it has been made. So interpreted religion, race, caste, community or language would not be allowed to play any role in the electoral process and should an appeal be made on any of those considerations the same would constitute a corrupt practice. With these few lines a answer the reference in terms of the order proposed by Lokur. J. (49) On a consideration of the entire material placed before us by learned counsels. We record our conclusions as follows: (i) The provisions of sub-section (3) of Section 123 of the Representation of the People Act, 1951 are required to be read and appreciated in the context of simultaneous and contemporaneous amendments inserting sub-section (3A) in Section 123 of the Act and inserting Section 153 A in the Indian Penal Code. (ii) So read together, and for maintaining the Purity of the electoral process and not vitiating it, sub- section (3) of Section 123 of the Representation of the People Act, 1951 must be given a broad and purposive interpretation thereby bringing within the sweep of a corrupt practice any appeal made to an elector by a candidate or his agent or by any other person with the consent of a candidate or his election agent to vote or refrain from voting for the furtherance of the prospects of the election of that candidate or for prejudicially affecting the election of any candidate on the ground of the religion, race, caste, community or language of (i) any candidate or (ii) his agent or (iii) any other person making the appeal with the consent of the candidate or (iv) the elector. (3) The Commission has instructed that all political parties shall take due not of the directions in the judgment for strict compliance. The political parties may also suitably brief and inform their lower formations and party cadres and all their candidates about the ruling of the Supreme Court and ask them to desist from any activities that would amount to soliciting votes in the name of religion, caste, etc. in any manner, in their own interest and in the interest of the party. Such appeals may also fall within the ambit of sub-paras (3) and (4) of Part I of the Model Code of conduct. ¼uksV& mijksdr i= ds-,q- foyýsm }kjk fy[kk x;k i= tks vusdtj ih &206 & ij fy[kk x;k ½ 253 ;gfd] mpp U;k;ky; U;w fnyyh MCY;w ih ¼C) no. 8363/2010 Common cause, A Regd. Society Vs. Bahujan Samaj Party ds laca/k esa fu.kz; fnukad ikfjr fd;k&^^ (1) The petition (a) impugns the order dated 11 th October, 2010 of Election Commission of India (ECI) of dismissal as not maintainable of the application preferred by petitioner seeking freezing of the symbol Elephant as the reserved symbol of the respondent Bahujan Samaj Party (BSP), a Recognised National Party within the meaning of Clauses 6 and 6A of the Election symbols (Reservation and Allotment) Order 1968, (Symbols order), and (b) seeks a mandamus to the ECI to cancel or freeze the reserved election symbol Elephant of the respondent BSP. (2) Notice of the petition was issued and a reply has been filed on behalf of the respondent BSP and to which a rejoinder has been filed by the petitioner. Vide order dated 16 th July, 2012 ECI which was earlier impleaded as respondent No. 1, was deleted from array of parties but its counsel requested to remain present. (3) When the matter was called on 25 th February 2016, the senior counsel for the respondent BSP stated that the order of ECI under challenge in this petition came to be passed in pursuance to an order of the Supreme Court in a petition filed by some other person and which petition is still pending before the Supreme Court and the said order of ECI has been placed before the Supreme Court for further consideration in that proceedings; he thus contended that the hearing of this petition be deferred till the decision of the Supreme Court. (4) It was however enquired from the senior counsel for the respondent BSP as to why in the last over five years for which this petition had been pending, the respondent BSP did not have this petition transferred to the Supreme Court or seek a clarification in this respect from the Supreme Court, particularly when it was informed that in the last five years the petition in the Supreme Court had been taken up on several occasions. (5) Per contra, the contention of the counsel for the petitioner was that though the impugned order of ECI, besides on the application of the petitioner is also on the applications of others but the petitioner herein is not a party in the proceedings before the Supreme Court and the relief claimed by the petitioner is also materially different from the relief claimed in the proceeding before the Supreme Court. (6) In this view of the matter, option was given to the senior counsel for the respondent BSP that this petition would be adjourned for a period of one month to enable the respondent BSP to seek directions from the Supreme Court. However the senior counsel for the respondent BSP did not press the objection taken earlier and accordingly the counsels were heard and judgment reserved. (7) It is the case of the petitioner (i) that the petitioner vide its application dated 25 th June, 2009 to ECI drew attention to the recent trend, of erecting at public places and at State Expense, statues of political functionaries and symbols linked to the ruling party- the statues entailing a monumental 78

79 waste of public resources were built to last till the end of time; this practice has assumed gargantuan proportions in the State of Uttar Pradesh, where statues of incumbent Chief Minister and other members of the respondent BSP and its election symbol Elephant were sprouting from countless memorials, public squares and parks; (ii) that such display has the effect of disturbing the level playing field vis-à-vis the political functionaries and candidates of other parties; reliance in this regard is placed on ECI s circulars No. 437/6/INST/2008-CC & BE dated 28 th March, 2009 and 1 st April 2009 prohibiting display in government buildings and premises of photographs and images of the political functionaries who have deep influence on the minds of electors and many of whom are still active in public life and may even be contesting the current general elections; (iii) that besides the petitioner, Shri Ravi Kant and Shri Sukumar, Advocates and one shri Atul Kumar Singh had also filed similar applications before ECI and all the three sets of applications were clubbed together; and (iv) that Shri Ravi Kant aforesaid also filed W.P. (C) No. 266/2009 before the Supreme Court seeking inter alia directions to the State of Uttar Pradesh to stop further construction and expenditure of public funds for installing the statues of the incumbent Chief Minister and the Party symbol of the respondent BSP in public land and to remove the statues in question from public land and the Supreme Court vide interim order dated 22 nd February 2010 in the said petition, finding that the said Shri Ravi Kant had also moved ECI for certain relief with respect to the statues, had directed ECI to decide the application/ representation of the said Shri Ravi Kant. (8) ECI, in the impugned order dated 11 th October, 2010 has found/ observed/ held : (i) That, the claim in the application of freezing of the election symbol amounted to withdrawing the symbol elephant from the respondent BSP and allotting an alternative symbol to the party so that the respondent BSP does not get an undue advantage of its symbol which had been propagated at the State cost; (ii) Allotment and reservation of symbol to recognized political parties or withdrawal of such allotment or reservation has to be traceable to specific provisions under the Symbols Order; (iii) Grant of recognition to a party which entitled it to a reserved symbol under the Symbols Order is dependent on the poll performance of the party in terms of the percentage of votes polled and the number of seats won as per the criteria laid down in paragraphs 6 A and 6B of the symbols order; (iv) Under the Symbols Order, withdrawal of reserved symbol is either: (a) A consequence of withdrawal of recognition upon failure of the party to come up with the poll performance as required; or (b) A consequence of the recognized political party failing or refusing to observe the provisions of the Model Code of conduct for Guidance of PoliticalParties and Candidates, (Model Code of Conduct) as issued by the ECI or to follow or carry out any lawful directions and instructions of the ECI given from time to time with a view to furthering the conduct of free, fair and peaceful elections or safeguarding the interests of the general public and the electorate in particular, also resulting in withdrawal of recognition. (v) Neither was it the ground of the petitioner or any of the other applicants before ECI that the respondent BSP had failed in the required poll performance or that it had violated any lawful direction or instruction issued by ECI. (vi)the only question which remained was whether the respondent BSP had violated the Model Code of Conduct by erecting and installing the statues of elephant and Ms. Mayawati. (vii) However the Model Code of Conduct comes into play when ECI announces any schedule for an election and it ceases to be effective on the completion of election by declaration of result; (viii) Every political party has a right to propagate its symbol by erecting of statues of the symbol and also of its leaders, without however misuse of public funds and official position; (ix) ECI is not empowered to go into the question of misuse of official position and public funds in the matter of erection of such statues as the same had the sanction of the State Legislature; (x) That the State Government had however refused to furnished the information as to where and how many of the statues had been erected and installed and thus ECI was in dark with respect thereto and unable to guage the impact of the statueson the mind of the electors; (xi) That thus ECI was not capable of granting the reliefs claimed; and. (xii) However at the time of elections ECI would take appropriate steps and measures to see that statues of Ms. Mayawati and BSP symbol elephant do not disturb the level playing field and do not give undue advantage to the respondent BSP vis-à-vis other political parties. (9) The counsel for the petitioner argued (i) that ECI in the impugned order has accepted most of the submissions of the petitioner and rejected almost all the contentions of the respondent BSP but notwithstanding the same held the application to be not maintainable; (ii) the application could not have been rejected on the ground of the respondent BSP having failed to provide the desired information; (iii) that ECI having accepted the contention that the respondent BSP was guilty of defeating the object of Model Code of Conduct by installing statues of its election symbol at public expense, ought to have withdrawn the symbol; (iv) that ECI vide its order dated 8 th January, 2012 had required each and every statue of elephant erected in public places in the State at government expense to be covered until the impending general election to the State Legislative Assembly; however no such covering was ordered during 2014 Lok Sabha Election; (v) that ECI has very wide power under Article 324 of the Constitution of India to issue any order/ direction to ensure free and fair elections which are critical to the preservation of our democratic polity; (vi) reliance is placed on Mohinder Singh Gill Vs. The Chief Election Commissioner, New Delhi (1978) 1 SCC 405, Union of India Vs. Association for Democratic Reforms (2002) 5 SCC 294 and Kuldip Nayar Vs. Union of India (2006) 7 SCC 1 to contend that where the law on the subject is silent, Article 324 is a reservoir of power for the ECI to act for the avowed purpose of pursuing the goal of free and fair election; (vi) that the installation of permanent representations of election symbol of a political party in a public place has the effect of permanently disturbing the level playing fielding an electoral contest; 79

80 and (vii) if the display of a photograph inside an office can vitiate the level playing field, the installation of a permanent statue at a public place which is visible at all times to every passerby can be said to have a deeper impact on the mind of the electorate. (10) Per contra, the senior counsel for the respondent BSP argued (i) that three is no provision in the Symbols Order to freeze a particular symbol; (ii) there can be no cancellation/ withdrawal of election symbol de hors the provisions of the Symbols Order; (iii) the respondent BSP did not gain anything in any manner from the erection and installation of the said statues in the Assembly elections held in the year 2012; (iv) that there is no bar to the use of an election symbol; (v) example was given of a bicycle and cow which are election symbols and can be seen all over; (vi) that a recognized political party cannot be left without a symbol; and, (vii) elephants are to be seen not only in the statues erected and installed by the State Government but in all the emples also. (11) The counsel for ECI stated that do s and don t qua the symbols are during the election time only and not otherwise. (12) The counsel for the petitioner in rejoinder argued that if the party in power so propagates its symbol with public money, then it is wrong, otherwise it is not. (13) I have considered the controversy and wondered whether there is any bar to a recognized political party with its own monies so propagating its symbol or its leaders, year round, by installing statues or hoardings thereof, in compliance with Municipal and other applicable Regulations. I am unable to find any, and as aforesaid the counsel for the petitioner also agreed that it is so open to a political party. (14) The only issue which thus remains is, of the respondent BSP having done so by misuse of public monies and public office. (15) However the counsel for the petitioner was at a loss to show any power vested in ECI to, on such grounds exercise any jurisdiction. (16) Though the Symbols order is not found to contain any specific clause even for allotment of a symbol to a recognized political party but Clause 5 thereof while giving the classification of symbols defines a reserved symbol as a symbol which is reserved for a recognized political party for exclusive allotment to contesting candidates setup by that party and vide Clause 8 thereof provides that a candidate set up by a recognized political party, at any election, in any constituency of India, shall choose and shall be allotted the symbol reserved for that party and no other symbol. Clause 8 (3) further provides that a reserved symbol shall not be chosen by or allotted to any candidate in any constituency other than a candidate set up by a recognized political party for whom such symbol has been reserved. There from it follows that ECI allots a reserved symbol to a recognized political party. The same necessarily has to be done by passing an order to the said effect. (17) I have wondered whether the power of ECI of making an order of allotment and reservation of election symbol for a recognized political party would in accordance with the General Clauses Act 1897, include the power to withdraw the election symbol so reserved/ allotted. (18) Section 16 of the General Clauses Act provides that where, by any Central Act or Regulation, a power to make any appointment is conferred, then, unless a different intention appears, the authority having power to make the appointment shall also have power to suspend or dismiss any person so appointed. Similarly Section 21 of the said Act provides that where, by any Central Act or Regulation, a power to issue notifications, orders, rules, or bye-laws is conferred, then that power includes a power, to add to, amend, very or rescind notifications, orders, rules or bye-laws so issued. (19) Though the symbols order may not qualify as a Central Act or Regulation but by virtue of Clause 2(2) thereof provides that the General Clauses Act shall as far as may be applied in relation to the interpretation of the Symbols order as it applies in relation to the interpretation of a Central Act. (20) Vis-à-vis Central Act, Supreme Court in Shree Sidhbali Steels Ltd. Vs State of U.P. (2011) 3SCC 193, referring besides to Section 21 of the General Clauses Act also to Section 14 thereof, held that when a power is conferred to do a particular act such power can be exercised from time to time and carries with it the power to withdraw, modify, amend or cancel. (21) vis-à-vis ECI, it was held in Janata Dal (Samajwadi) Vs. The Election Commission of India (1996) 1 SCC 235 that it cannot be conceived that a political party, Clause 2 (2) thereof making the provisions of the General Clauses Act applicable, vests power in ECI, which had issued the order recognizing a political party, to derecognise the political party. (22) I may however state that since the judgment aforesaid, vide notification dated 1 st December, 2000 the Symbols order was amended and Clause 6C thereof as it now stands, lays down conditions for continued recognition as a National or State Party. (23) However subsequently, in Indian National Congress (I) Vs. Institute of Social Welfare (2002) 5 SCC 685;in the context of the question, whether ECI has power to de-register or cancel the registration of a political party on the ground that it had called for hartal by force, intimidation or coercion and thereby violated the provisions of the Constitution or on the ground of having violated the undertaking given at the time of its registration, it was held that section 21 of the General Clauses Act cannot be invoked by ECI to de-register a political party on such grounds because for Section 21 to apply, the order which can be modified or rescinded has to be in the nature of a notification, rule, bye- law etc., i.e. either executive or legislative in character but de-registration of a political party on such grounds would entail a quasi judicial enquiry under Section 29A of the Representation of People Act 1951 (R.P. Act) into whether the undertaking and Section 29A have been violated or not and section 21 has no application where an authority is required to act quasi judicially. It was further held that parliament deliberately omitted to vest ECI with the power to de register a political party for non compliance with the conditions for the grant of such registration- may be for the reason that under the Constitution ECI is required to function independently and ensure free and fair elections; an enquiry into noncompliance with the conditions for the grant of registration might involve the Commission in matters of a political nature and could mean monitoring by the Commission of the political activities, programmes and 80

81 ideologies of political parties. It was however clarified that ECI is not deprived of its power to cancel the registration where registration has been obtained by practicing fraud or forgery or where a registered political party amends its nomenclature of association, rules, regulations abrogating therein conforming to provisions of Section 9 A (5) of R.P. Act or intimates that it has ceased to have faith in the allegiance to the Constitution of India or on any like ground where no enquiry is called for on the part of ECI. (24) In the judgment supra of a bench of two Hon ble Judges, the earlier judgment in Janta Dal (Samajwadi) of a bench of three Hon ble Judges was not noticed. In fact Supreme Court earlier, in Kanhiya Lal Omar Vs. R.K. Trivedi (1985) 4 SC 628 referring on Sadiq Ali Vs. Election Commission of India (1972) 4 SCC 664 which were also not noticed, held that ECI cannot be disabled from exercising its plenary powers under the Conduct of Election Rules in the matter of allotment of symbols and for issuing directions in connection therewith and that it is plainly essential that ECI should have the power to settle disputes between two rival groups or between splinter groups for allotment of a symbol. (25) Such power, I may notice, is expressly with the ECI under Clause 15 of the Symbols Order. So is the power given by Clause 16 A to suspend or withdraw recognition on the grounds of violation or defiance of Model Code of Conduct or, of any lawful direction or instruction of ECI and which enquiry is to be after giving a reasonable opportunity of showing cause. In my humble opinion, an enquiry of the nature mentioned in Clause 16 A of Symbols Order into whether a recognized political party has defied the provisions of the Model Code of Conduct and/ or of the directions issued by ECI from time to time for free, fair and peaceful elections or for safeguarding the interest of general public and electorate in particular would necessarily take the hue of a political nature and/ or could mean monitoring by the ECI of the political activities, programmes and ideologies of political parties. The same appears to belie the logic/ reasoning given in Indian National Congress (I) supra that an enquiry into noncompliance with the conditions for the grant of registration might involve the Commission in matters of a political nature and could mean monitoring by the Commission of the political activities, programmes and ideologies of political parties. (26) I however remain bound by Indian National Congress (I) Supra and as per which the provisions of General Clauses Act cannot be read in the Symbols Order for exercise of a power requiring a quasi-judicial enquiry. Certainly, in the absence of any existing direction of ECI with respect to the situation of which grievance is made by petitioner, withdrawal of symbol or freezing of symbol would require a quasi- judicial enquiry. The petitioner also has not contended otherwise. (27) Even otherwise, as per Symbols Order, recognition as a political party carries a right to a reserved symbol. I have not been able to find any conditions prescribed qua use of or dealing with that symbol. It thus appears that a symbol once reserved for a recognized political party under the prevalent laws, cannot betaken away. This is certainly a lacuna and which, if the averments of the petitioner are correct, has indeed been exploited by the respondent BSP. However with respect to the law of elections, which is a special law, it has famously been said by the Supreme Court in Jyoti Basu Vs. Debi Ghosal (1982) 1 SCC 691 that a right to elect or to be elected, fundamental though it is to democracy, is anomalously enough neither a fundamental right nor a Common Law Right and is pure and simple a statutory right; and that outside of statute, there is no right to elect, no right to be elected and no right to dispute an election- statutory creations they are and therefore subject to statutory limitations. (28) I therefore hold that there is no power in ECI under the Symbols Order, to withdraw/ freeze an election symbol once allotted and/ or reserved for a recognized political party and the only manner in which the symbol once allotted/ reserved is lost, is on loss of recognition. Though the powers of ECI otherwise flow from Article 324 of Constitution of India and are plenary but ECI, in exercise of such powers having promulgated the Symbols Order and having therein not provided for such eventuality, the same, in my opinion, cannot be sprung as a surprise. (29) Neither ECI had nor I have any doubt that if there is any truth in what the petitioner complains of, then what the respondent BSP has done is wrong. Wherever there is a wrong, there has to be remedy. There is no wrong without a remedy- ubi jus ibi remedium and which, Supreme Court in Dhannalal Vs. Kalawatibai (2002) 6 SCC 16 has held, leads to the invention of the form of action. I am of the view that a constitutional functionary as ECI, upon finding a wrong or a possibility of wrong in the arena of election and qua which it has plenary powers cannot express helplessness owing to lack of any existing provision and has to devise ways and means to address the wrong, to maintain purity in the stream of election. ECI, in this spirit has to be continuously evolving to keep pace with the evolving society and ought to have invented the remedy. (30) Clause 16 A of the Symbols Order providing for suspension or withdrawal of recognition is also found to be providing therefore either on the ground of refusing or defying to observe the provisions of the Model Code of Conduct for Guidance of Political Parties and Candidates as issued by the ECI or on the ground of refusing or defying to follow or carry out the lawful directions and instructions of ECI given from time to time with a view to furthering the conduct of free, fair and peaceful elections or safeguarding the interests of the general public and the electorate in particular. However as aforesaid before de recognizing a political party a reasonable opportunity of hearing is required to be given. (31) ECI in the impugned order has held that Model Code of Conduct is applicable only during the election and not otherwise. No dent to the said reasoning of ECI has been made by the petitioner. As far as the other ground for withdrawal of recognition accorded to a political party prescribed in Clause 16 A supra is concerned, though I have perused the Handbook for Candidates published by the ECI in the year 2009, the Code of Conduct Do s & Don t s published by ECI on 7 th January, 2007 as well as the Model Code of Conduct for the Guidance of political parties and candidates published by ECI in 2007 and also the 81

82 Compendium of Instructions on Model Code of Conduct published by ECI by ECI on 21 st August, 2015 as available on the website of ECI but I am unable to find any instruction/ guideline prescribed prohibiting the conduct of which the petitioner accuses the respondent BSP and for defiance of which it can be said that ECI ought to have initiated proceedings for withdrawal of recognition of the respondent BSP. (32) However it is found (i) that vide ECI s letter No. 3/9/2004/J.S.-II dated 24 th August, 2004 the directions relating to aspect of advertisements in print media were issued (See instructions serial no. 32 in the Compendium of Instructions on Model Code of Conduct published on 21 st August, 2015); (ii) that vide ECI s letter No. 437/6/2004-PLN III dated 24 th December, 2004 the party in power was directed to ensure that no cause is given for any complaint that it has used its official position for the purposes of its election campaign and issue of advertisement at the cost of public exchequer in the newspapers and other media and the misuse of official mass media during the election period for partisan coverage of political news and publicity regarding achievements with a view to furthering the prospects of the party in power was prohibited and direction issued for removal of hoardings, advertisements, etc. which purport to project the achievements of any living political functionaries or political party or which carry their photos or names or party symbol, at the cost of public resources (See instructions serial No. 30 in the Compendium of Instructions on Model Code of Conduct published on 21 st August 2015); (iii) in the Handbook for candidates- 2009, vide Clause 6(A) thereof wall writing, pasting of posters or display of any cutouts, hoardings, banners, flags etc. on Government premises and Government offices and their campus was prohibited and the party in power was directed to ensure that no public place was dominated/ monopolized and that all parties and candidates should be provided equal opportunity in this regard; (iv) in the Code of Conduct- Do s & Don t s dated 7 th January, 2007, announcement of new projects or programme or concessions or financial grants in any form or promises thereof or laying of foundation stones, etc. which have the effect of influencing the voters in favour of the party in power was prohibited and misuse of official machinery for election work was also prohibited; and, (v) in the Model Code of Conduct for Guidance of Political Parties and Candidates also, Chapter VII dealing with party in power and issues detailed instructions to ensure that no cause is given to any complaint that it has used its official position for the purposes of its election campaign. (33) It would thus be seen that in spirit, what the petitioner complains of, is prohibited though not expressly. What the respondent BSP is accused of is akin to advertisement by ruling party at the cost of public exchequer in the print media, use of by party in power of government buildings/ premises and use by party in power of official machinery and of which is already prohibited and indulging wherein could lead to withdrawal of recognition and resultant loss of symbol. I am of the view that since ECI till now has not issued any express direction or instruction prohibiting recognized political parties from doing what the respondent BSP is accused of and further since the petitioner, for the wrong alleged invoked the remedy of recall/ freezing of symbol and which I have held to be not available, the respondent BSP should not be caught unaware and no case for proceeding against respondent BSP for withdrawal of recognition is made out. (34) I am however of the view that there indeed is a need for ECI to now, that the lacuna has been detected and has complained of having been exploited, to consider issuing express directions in this regard so that no political party in power can exploit the same in future. There can be no doubt of the power of ECI to issue such a direction. I direct accordingly. (35) That, will however take care only of the future. The question of the installations already made by the respondent BSP continuing to give an undue advantage to the respondent BSP in future elections remains. I am of the view that covering thereof during the elections does not undo what they are capable of doing. The size of the said installations, visible form surrounding areas, even though covered, continue to remind the public of what lies beneath. In fact a covered installation is more of a reminder and has a higher impact capable of influencing. I am unable to agree ith the senior counsel for respondent BSP that the loss suffered in elections is proof of the same having no influence. A failed attempt does not wash away the wrong means adopted to succeed. Just like irrespective of the party in power coming back to power or not, its violation of the directions already issued would render it liable for withdrawal of recognition, so is the position here. (36) A political party in power cannot use development activities carried out by it and which the government in any case is expected to perform, to propagate its symbol or its leaders so as to come in the way of a free and fair election. The performance of a political party in governance should be allowed to speak for itself. (37) No merit is also found in contention of senior counsel for BSP that most of the symbols are found commonly in day to day life and are thus incapable of influencing. As aforesaid, there is no bar to a political party propagating itself at its own cost. The issue is of dong so from public places and with use of public funds to which the political party by being in power gets access. (38) Supreme Court recently in Common Cause Vs. Union of India (2015) 7 SCC I, concerned with a public interest litigation seeking restraint on the Union of India and the State Governments from using public funds on the government advertisements which were primarily intended to project individual functionaries of the Government or a political party, constituted a committee to suggest guidelines to regulate government action in the matter, so as to prevent misuse/ wastage of public funds in connection with such advertisements and approved of the guidelines framed inter alia to the effect that the advertising must not be directed at promoting political interest of a political party. (39) The reasoning of ECI, that it could not make a factual assessment because of the directions seeking information remaining uncomplied also cannot be accepted. Supreme Court in Sadiq Ali supra has held that ECI is an authority created by Constitution of India and according to Article 324 has superintendence, direction and 82

83 control of the conduct of elections and the fact that the power of resolving disputes has been vested in such a high authority would provide a guarantee that the power would be used in a reasonable manner. ECI in my view, cannot abdicate its power for such reason. (40) I therefore dispose of this petition with a request to ECI to: (A) Within a period of three months, consider issuing appropriate direction/ guideline within the meaning of Clause 16A(b) of the Symbols. Order preventing recognized political party in power from using public places and public funds for propagating its reserve symbol and/or its leaders, so as to come in the way of conducting of free fair and peaceful election and to safeguard the interest of the general public and the electorate in future; and, (B) After issuing the said direction/ guideline, within a further period of three months therefrom, consider the actions already done by the respondent BSP and as complained of by the petitioner are in violation of the said guideline and if finds so, to give an opportunity to the respondent BSP to undo the same, so as to in future not obstruct free and fair election and if the respondent BSP does not avail of the said opportunity to initiate proceedings under clause 16 A of the Symbols order for withdrawal of recognition thereof. ekuuh; U;k;ewfrZ Jh jktho lgk;,amykw }kjk fnukad dks fn;s x;s vkns k vusdtj ih& ] ;gfd] Jh fot; nso fmivh bysd ku deh kuj Hkkjr fuokzpu vk;ksx }kjk fnukad dks vius vkns k esa fy[kk fd &^^Judgment dated of the Hon ble Delhi High Court in WP (C) No. 8363/2010 (Common Cause Vs Bahujan Samaj Party) in the matter of election symbol of Bahujan Samaj Party. (1) The Bahujan Samaj Party (hereinafter referred to as the BSP ) is a recognized National Party under the provisions of Election Symbols (Reservation and Allotment) Order, 1968 (for short Symbols Order ) having the election symbol Elephant reserved for it in all States and Union Territories, except in the State of Assam. (2) In June- July 2009 the Election Commission received three petitions raising the issue of statues of Elephant (reserved symbol of BSP) and Ms. Mayawati (President of that party and then Chief Minister of Uttar Pradesh) that were installed in various places, including public parks, in Uttar Pradesh at Government expense, and praying for freezing of the symbol Elephant as the reserved symbol of the BSP. These petitions were from (i) Shri Atul Kumar Singh, Secretary General of an organization named Rashitra Nirman, (ii) Shri Kamal Kany Jaswal, Director, Common Cause, and (iii) S/Sh. Ravi Kant and Sukumar, Advocates. (3) In their petition dated 15 th July, 2009, S/Sh. Ravi Kant and Sukumar, Advocates, stated that the statues of elephant and Ms. Mayawati were installed in public places in Lucknow and Noida, with the money spent from the State Exchequer. They stated that the Lucknow Development Authority and Noida Authority provided this information to them in reply to the applications under the Right to Information Act. (4) The reliefs claimed in the petitions before the Commission were as follows :- (a) The election symbol of BSP may be frozen and the party granted another symbol; (b) Ms. Mayawati may be disqualified from contesting elections as her several statues will always remain to continue to create an unequal playing ground for her opponents during elections and thus violate the very concept of free and fair elections; (c) Since this jeopardizes the concept of free and fair elections, the Election Commission should call an all party meeting to arrive at consensus on the above subject. (5) The Commission disposed of the complaints as not maintainable vide of order dated holding that the reliefs claimed could not be granted on the grounds mentioned in the petitions. The Commission, in the said order, inter alia, observed and held as follows : the main plank of defence of BSP is that the statues of elephant and leaders of BSP have been erected by the State Government and not by the party. In the erection of such states, the State Government has acted with the specific sanction of the State Legislature by passing valid Appropriation Acts. The BSP contends that the Commission cannot, therefore, go into the question of installation of these states, and the expenditure incurred thereon by the State Government. Reliance in support of the above contention has been placed on the decisions of the Hon ble Supreme Court in Ram Jawaya Kapoor Vs State of Punjab [1955 (2) SCR 225] and Bhim Singh Vs. Union of India, 2010 (5) SCC 538 to the effect that Judicial interference is permissible when the action of the government is unconstitutional and not when such action is not wise or that the extent of expenditure is not for the good of the State. We are of the view that all such questions must be debated and decided in the legislature and not in court. It was contended that when even the Apex Court of the land cannot go into the propriety or otherwise of any government action or expenditure, a fortiori, the Commission cannot sit in judgment over the decisions taken by the State Legislature and the executive act performed by the State Government in pursuance of such decisions of the State Legislature. The Commission sees quite a force in the above contention of the BSP and it cannot be lightly brushed aside. The question whether the BSP has misused its position as the ruling party in getting the statutes of Ms. Mayawati and elephant installed with public funds, during the non election period, is not for the Commission to go into. In view of taking into account the totality of the facts and circumstances available to the Commission, the reliefs prayed for by Shri Ravi Kant and others in their petitions under reference are not capable of being granted on the grounds urged and thus the said petitions are not maintainable. (6) The Commission s order dated was challenged before the Delhi High Court in Writ Petition No. W.P. (C) 8363/2010 (common cause Vs. Bahujan Samaj Party). The High Court disposed of the petition vide judgment dated with the following directions :- I dispose of this petition with a request to ECI to : (A) Within a period of three months, consider issuing appropriate direction/ guideline within the meaning of Clause 16 A (b) of the Symbols Order preventing recognized political party in power from using public places 83

84 and public funds for propagating its reserved symbol and/ or its leaders, so as to come in the way of conducting of free, fair and peaceful election and to safeguard the interest of the general public and the electorate in future; and (B) After issuing the said direction/ guideline, within a further period of three months therefrom, consider whether the actions already done by the respondent BSP and as complained of by the petitioner are in violation of the said guideline and if found so, to give opportunity to BSP to undo the same, so as to in future not obstruct the free and fair election and if the respondent BSP does not avail of the said opportunity, to initiate proceedings under paragraph 16 A of symbols order for withdrawal of recognition thereof. (7) With respect to the first direction of the High Court as quoted above, instruction was issued by the commission on in a circular letter Additional to political F/A to the effect that no political party shall henceforth either use or allow the use of any public funds or public place or government machinery for carrying out any activity that would amount to advertisement for the party or propagating the election symbol allotted to the party. (8) The second direction in the High Court s judgment was, as mentioned above, to consider whether the action on the part of respondent BSP as complained by the petitioner was in violation of guidelines issued by the Commission, and if found to be so, to give opportunity to BSP to undo the same, and if the BSP does not do so, to initiate proceedings under Para 16 A of Symbols Order for withdrawal of recognition. (9) Before the Commission issued the abovementioned guidelines to political parties on , the judgment of the High Court was furnished to all recognized National and State Parties asking them to given their views regarding the guidelines to be issued in the matter. The BSP was among the few parties that furnished their views in this regard. The BSP conveyed their comments and views with regard to both the directions. The main contention of BSP in the views furnished by them was that the construction of the statues was an activity undertaken by the sovereign state Govt. And not by that party. At the relevant time, when the construction of statues was carried out, there was no direction of the Commission covering the subject or in any manner prohibiting such activity. The party also argued that any direction putting curbs on activities such as the subject matter of the complaints as per the present directions cannot be applied retrospectively. The Party further stated that if the Commission issues instructions in this regard, they will abide by the same in future. (10) The operative part of the Commission s instructions in its circular letter dated is reproduced below : 4. Accordingly, the Commission has directed that no political party shall henceforth either use or allow the use of any public funds or public pace or government machinery for carrying out any activity that would amount to advertisement for the party or propagating the election symbol allotted to the party. 5. It is clarified that any violation of the above directions would be treated as violation of a lawful direction of the Commission within the meaning of paragraph 16 A of the Election Symbols (Reservation & Allotment) Order, (11) The Commission has carefully considered the matter in its entirety. It is a fact that prior to the instructions issued on , there was no direction or instruction of the Commission dealing with activities such as erecting structures depicting the election symbol undertaken by Government. The view hitherto, prior to the instruction of , was that the Commission would look into cases that come up during the period of elections when the Model Code of Conduct is in operation. Now, in the light of the abovementioned judgment of the High Court and the instructions of , was that the Commission would look into cases that come up during the period of elections when the Model Code of Conduct is in operation. Now, in the light of the abovementioned judgment of the High Court and the instructions issued by the Commission on , in pursuance of the judgment, any activity public funds or govt. resources for propagating election symbol of any party either by the party itself or by the Govt. could invite action against the party. In such case, the party which is the beneficiary of the activity cannot escape responsibility on the plea that the activity was the result of government decision. The govt. is formed by political parties and the ruling party or parties cannot misuse public funds or government resources for propagating their election symbol. (12) However, as regards action against BSP on the ground of the construction of statutes of question, carried out in period, the Commission is of the considered view that the instructions now issued on cannot be enforced retrospectively so as to take action against the party. This order has the approval of the Election Commission. vijay Dubey Deupty Election Commission. }kjk fn;k x;k fnukad tks vusdtj ih& ;gfd] Jh,u-Vh- HkwfV;k vamj lsøsavjh Hkkjr fuokzpu vk;ksx }kjk fnukad dks Hksts x;s i= v/;{k cgqtu lektoknh ikvhz dks fn;k x;k ftlds vuqlkj&^^ Complaint regarding alleged violation of the Hon ble Supreme Court order dated regarding seeking votes in the name of religion, caste by Bahujan Samaj Party, a National Party. I am directed to State that three different complaints, two filed by Sh. Neeraj Shanker Saxena and one by Dr. Rajeev Singh have been received in the Commission alleging that Bahujan Samaj Party has violated the Hon ble Supreme Court sjudgment dated regarding seeking votes in the name of religion, caste etc. in Civil Appeal No. 37 of 1992 (Abhiram Singh Vs C.D. Commachen) with C.A. No of In this connection, attention is invited to the Commission s Letter No. 56/LET/FUNC/PP/PPS-II/2017 dated (copy enclosed). Further in the Order dated passed by the Hon ble Allahabad High Court in the Misc. Bench No. 870 of 2017 filed by Sh. Neeraj Shankar Saxena, the Hon ble Court has made the following observation/ direction with reference to the pending complaints: The Election Commission of India shall proceed only after putting the concerned party to notice and verifying the contents of the allegation made in accordance with law and it is expected that such decision 84

85 shall be taken expeditiously by the Election Commission of India. Copies of the complaints along with a copy of the High Court Order dated are enclosed herewith. Your party is directed to furnish comments in respect of the allegations made in the complaints latest by If no response is received by that date, it will be presumed that you have no comments to offer and the Commission will take the appropriate action in the matter. fuokzpu vk;ksx dk mijksdr i= fnukad tks vusdtj ih& ;gfd] mpp U;k;ky; m-iz- y[kuå csup dh Mcy csup dh U;k;ewfrZ Jh }kjk ikfjr vkns k fnukad Case MISC, BENCH No. 870 of 2017 Neeraj Shankar Saxena Vs Election Commission of India Thru. Chief Election Commissioner Hon ble Armeshwar Pratap Sahi. J. Hon ble Sanjay Harkauli, J. }kjk ikfjr vkns k esa fy[kk x;k fd&^^ Heard Shri H.S. Jain, learned Counsel for the petitioner and Shri O.P. Srivastava, learned Senior Counsel for the respondent No. 1 / Election Commission of India. The Nature of the order that we propose to pass after hearing the learned counsel for the Election Commission of India, it is not necessary for us to issue any notices to the respondent Nos. 2 and 3 at this stage. This petition has been filed contending that the leader of the respondent no. 2/ political party who is also the National President has openly made certain declarations to the public at large which, according to the petitioner, amounts to wooing the electorate based on a religious appeal that runs counter to the ratio, letter and spirit of the interpretation given by the Hon ble Apex Court in the case of Abhiram Singh Vs C.D. Commachen decided on in Civil Appeal No. 37 of 1992 while considering the impact of Section 123 (3) & Section 29 A of the Representation of Peoples Act, The contention on behalf of the petitioner is that such a political party whose president has made such statements in public incurs a disqualification which does not authorize the political party any further to either claim its continuance of recognition or field its candidates on its election symbol. The contention, therefore, is that any poll campaigning or public speaking that amounts to wooing the voters on religious lines is a clear defiance of law and therefore, the Election Commission of India is bound to take action against such persons or political parties keeping in view the nature of the evidence filed on record through a Compact Disc with the supplementary affidavit today. Learned counsel for the Election Commission of India submits that there are limitations on the exercise of any such power and also its stages, inasmuch as, if the issue arises about disqualification as prescribed under the Representation of Peoples Act, 1951 then in that event, the assessment of any such statement amounting to either a violation of law or a corrupt practice has to be dealt with at different levels and forums as provided under the Representation of Peoples Act, 1951 but a direction from this Court to that effect may not be necessary in the wake of the fact that some application has already been moved before the Election Commission of India which is being processed and in that event, such an application is found to be competent and entertainable in relation to the allegations made, the same shall be dealt with in accordance with law by the Election Commission of India. Shri Srivastava further submits that so far as the judgment of the Hon ble Apex Court is concerned, the same was a reference which has been answered in relation to a dispute arising out of an election petition viz-a-viz the disqualification of a particular candidate where the law relating to such disqualification on the strength of the words used in Section 123(3) has been interpreted and the majority view has been expressed which is binding on all Courts in relation to any such matter of corrupt practice arising out of an election petition. He, therefore, submits that so far as the present allegations are concerned, the same do not arise out of any election petition but is a dispute about public speaking and alleged allurement of voters on the basis of religion and caste. He, therefore, submits that such prevention or prohibition or any regulation whether can be made by the Election Commission of India or not, will be considered as and when such an application is processed and decided. Consequently we dispose off writ petition with liberty to the Election Commission of India to proceed to examine any such pending complaint or complaints that may be received and then also assess as to whether the ratio of the judgment of the Hon ble Apex Court in the case of Abhiram Singh (Supra) would be attracted while proceeding to pass any orders in relation to the nature of the complaint which has been made in the present writ petition. The Election Commission of India shall proceed only after putting the concerned party to notice and verifying the contents of the allegation made in accordance with law and it is expected that such decision shall be taken expeditiously by the Election Commission of India. With the aforesaid direction, the Writ petition is disposed off. mijksdr vkns k fnukad vusdtj ih& ;gfd] Jh ds-,q- foyýsm izhafliy lsøsvjh Hkkjr fuokzpu vk;ksx }kjk lhkh jktuhfrd ikfvz;ksa ds v/;{k lfpo dks ekuuh; mpp U;k;ky; ds vkns k fnukad ds laca/k esa tkjh fd;k x;k i= fnukad &^^ Hon ble Delhi High Court s Order dated in W.P. (C) No.8363/2010- Common Cause Vs Bahujan Samaj Party- regarding. The Commission s letter of even number, dated 9 th September, 2016, in the matter of order dated passed by the Hon ble Delhi High Court in WP (C) No of Common cause Vs Bahujan Samaj Party. In the said judgment, the Hon ble High Court has, inter alia, directed that appropriate direction/ guideline be issued within the meaning of paragraph 16 A of the symbols order preventing recognized political party in power from using public places and public funds for propagating the elections symbol of the party. (2) Before taking final decision, the Commission decided to obtain the views of the recognized parties. Accordingly vide the above referred letter dated 9 th September, 2016, the recognized National and State parties were requested to furnish their views in the matter latest by The parties which have furnished their views in the matter have supported the idea of having guidelines in this regard. (3) The Commission has considered the matter in the light of the directions of the Hon ble High Court and also 85

86 the views expressed by the political parties. Having so considered the matter, the Commission is of the view that utilizing public funds/ public place for promoting any political party or propagating its election symbol would be antithetical to the concept of free and fair election and the principle of level playing field for all stakeholders. (4) Accordingly, the Commission has directed that no political party shall henceforth either use or allow the use of any public funds or public place or government machinery for carrying out any activity that would amount to advertisement for the party or propagating the election symbol allotted to the Party. (5) It is clarified that any violation of the above directions would be treated as violation of a lawful direction of the Commission within meaning of paragraph 16A of the election Symbols (Reservation & Allotment) Order, mijksdr i= ds-,q- foyýsam izhfaliy lsøsvjh fuokzpu vk;ksx }kjk fnukad dks fy[kk x;k tks vusdtj ih& ;gfd] Jh ds-,q- foyýsm izhafliy lsøsvjh Hkkjr fuokzpu vk;ksx }kjk v/;{k lfpo dks ekuuh; mpp U;k;ky; ds vkns k fnukad ds laca/k esa tkjh fd;k x;k i= fnukad &^^Hon ble Delhi High Court s Order dated in W.P. (C) No. 8363/2010 Common Cause Vs Bahujan Samaj Party regarding. The Commission s circular letter No. 56/4/LET/ECI/FUNC/PP/PPS-II/2015, dated 7 th October, 2016, addressed to all political parties, in the context of the abovementioned order of the Hon ble Delhi High Court regarding use of public funds/ public places for propagating election symbol of political parties. (2) In the above- referred letter, the Commission has directed that no political party shall either use or allow the use of any public funds or public place or government machinery for carrying out any activities that would amount to advertisement for the party or propagating the election symbol allotted to the Party. (3) This is for your kind information and appropriate action. mijksdr i= ds-,q- foyýsam izhfaliy lsøsvjh fuokzpu vk;ksx }kjk fnukad dks fy[kk x;k tks vusdtj ih& ;gfd] fxjh k kekz Xokfy;j }kjk fnukad dks Hkkjr fuokzpu vk;ksx dks Hksts x;s lwpuk ds vf/kdkj ds rgr QkbZy ua- 464/GJ-HP/2014WS-I esa fuokzpu vk;ksx }kjk iznku dh xbz tkudkjh ds vuqlkj & A report received from the CEO, Gujrat regarding the conduct of shri Narendra Modi, candidates of BJP from the Gujrat State states that he has violated the law I,e Section 126 of RP Act, Submitted for orders. Pr. Secy (KAK). Date The matter was discussed in the communist meeting today. Communist viewed the video happings of the event recevied from EMMC. As deredid in the communist meeting, the DPA of when advanced to chief Seceratary & DGP Gujrat with you enoased to CEO, Gujrat is may below for approval. The said letter has been unlooded on the commission s website, A draft notice to Shri Narendra Modi to put up for kind approval. Dated , Discussed with DEC (VZ)-the file submitted for orders of the commission. Date Discussed in the Commission metter. Commission devdid that snice Gujrat police has filed fil in the matter no action is required dated , The matter was SL. No. 05(R) PUC (SL. No. 16/C) Kindly see and pass it on to the concerned Zonal Section for information and record. L.A. (S.K.M.) Sd/- dated Pl. send to Pr. Secretary/Secretary in charge of Gujarat State. Pr. Secretary (w.) Sd/- dated Please keep this in the relevant file Pr. Secretary (K.A.K.) Sd/- dated Reference as above Submitted for information please. Hkkjr fuokzpu vk;ksx dh vkns k if=dk tks vusdtj ih& ;gfd] fnukad 30 vizsy 2014 dks vuhrk djoky phq bysd ku vkwqhlj }kjk Mh-bZ-vks vgenkckn vksj lh-bz-vksxqtjkr,oa ftyk fuokzpu vf/kdkjh o dysdvj vgenkckn dks fn;s x;s vius vkosnu esa fy[kk x;k fd & Complaint regarding Sh. Narendra Modi Attachments CM Polling Day doc, The letter of DEO attached below. As per my telephonic conversation with him, in addition the following may be noted: 1. There was no violation apparently of mcc inside the booth or within 100 mt premises. 2. The press was held beyond the 100 mt mark. 3. the clip is being arranged from the local TV channels and shall be send in the form of a link as soon as it is made available. Hence it is clear section 126 would be involved in this case as I have myself also seen him show the symbol of the party as a gesture of holding it before the cameras while addressing press. Kindly guide for further necessary action. regards, regards Anita Karwal, Chief Electoral Officer, Gujrat. tks vusdtj ih& ;gfd] dysdvj,oa ftyk fuokzpu vf/kdkjh vgenkckn }kjk fnukad dks eq[; fuokzpu vf/kdkjh] xqtjkr jkt;] xka/khuxj }kjk fn;s x;s i= esa fy[kk x;k fd & Election to Lok-Sabha 2014, Complaint regarding the Conduct of Sh. Narendra Modi at the time of Casting his Vote. It is to be submitted that Sh. Narendra Modi visited a Polling Booth at Ranip area of Ahemdabad to cast his vote for Lok Sabha Election today morning. After casting his vote, he moved towards an area where media people had assembled. This spot is adjoining the 100 meter marking on the road with reference to the polling Booth. At the said location, he interacted with the media while carrying his party symbol in his hand. This preliminary report is based on the oral briefing received from AFO, Sabarmati. tks vusdtj ih& ;gfd] Jh ih-lh- Bkdqj Mk;jsDVj tujy,oa balisdvj tujy iqfyl] xqtjkr jkt; xka/khuxj] fnukad dks fn;s x;s i= tks Jh ds- vt; dqekj fizalhiy lsøsvjh Hkkjr fuokzpu vk;ksx dks fn;s x;s vius i= esa fy[kk x;k fd& Violation of provisions of Sec 126 of RP Act by Shri Narendara Modi and others. Your letter No. 464/GJ-HP/2014/WS-I dated , regarding violation of provisions of Sec. 126 of RP Act by Shri Narendra Modi and others. 2. As per the directions of the Commission, all filed level police officials had been 86

87 directed to take prompt legal action against the persons for violations of the provisions of section 126 of RP Act 1952 and Section 188 of IPC. Consequently, an offence has been registered by Ahmedabad City vide DCB PCR No. 3045/2014 under section 126(1)(a) & (b) of RP Act, 1951 and Sec 188 of Indian Penal Code against Shri Narendra Modi & Other unknown persons. Similarly, another non cognization offence has been registered by Ahmedabad city vide DCB NC No 1/2014 under section 126(1) (b) of RP Act, 1951 against TV Channels. The copies of the above said FIRs will be submitted shortly. As per the recent instructions of Election Commission the districts other than Ahmedabad City have been instructed not to register offences in the same matter in their jurisdictions. Copy to 1. The Chief Secretary, Govt. of Gujarat, Block No. 1, Sachivalaya, Gandhinagar, 2. The Addl. Chief Secretary, Home Department, Govt. of Gujarat, Block No. 2, Sachivalaya Gandhinagar, 3. The Chief Electoral Offier, Gujarat State, General Admistration Department, Block No. 7, Sachivalaya Gandhinagar,tks vusdtj ih& ;gfd] fnukad dks Jh f kokuan >k iqfyl dfe uj vgenkckn flvh] }kjk Jh ds- vt; dqekj fizalhiy lsøsvjh Hkkjr fuokzpu vk;ksx] eq[; lfpo xqtjkr jkt; xka/khuxj],-lh-,l- ¼x`g ea=ky;½ xqtjkr jkt; xka/khuxj] iqfyl egkfuns kd xqtjkr] eq[; fuokzpu vf/kdkjh xqtjkr dks fn;s x;s i= esa fy[kk x;k fd & Violation of provisions of Section 126 of R.P. Act 1951 by Shri Narendra Modi and other regarding. 1. Election Commission of India s letter No. 464/GJ-HP/2014/WS-1 dated DGP Gujarat State s Fax No. G-1/SCR/LSE-2014/NM/2014/620 dated With reference to above subject and reference the directions of the Election Commission of India have been complied with and two separate offences have been registered at DCB Police station (Ahmedabad City) vide (1) DCB PS II CR No. 3045/2014 u/s. 126(1) (a) and 126 (1) (b) of R.P. Act. 1951, 188 of IPC and (2) NC Entry No. 1/14, DCB PS u/s. 126 (1) of R.P. Act, 1951, copies of the FIRs are attached herewith for ready reference. mijksdr i= tks vusdtkj ih & ;gfd] Jh ih-lh- Bkdqj Mk;jsDVj tujy,oa balisdvj tujy iqfyl] xqtjkr jkt; xka/khuxj] fnukad dks fn;s x;s i= tks iqfyl dfe uj vgenkckn flvh] lwjr flvh] jktdksv flvh] cm+ksnjk flvh,oa lelr iqfyl v/kh{kd jkt; xqtjkr }kjk Hksts x;s vius i= esa fy[kk fd & Violation of provisions of Section 126 of RP. Act 1951 by Shri Narendra Modi & Others regarding. Letter No. 464/GJ-HP/2014/WS-I Dared of Election Commission of India, Nirvachan Sadan, Ashoka Road, New Delhi. Please, find letter no. 464/GJ- HP/2014/WS-I Dated of Election Commission of India, Nirvachan Sadan, Ashoka Road, New Delhi enclosed herewith for your kind persual. (2) You are requested to register a criminal case against Shri Narendra Modi & Others in compliance of the aforesaid orders of the Election Commission of India, Nirvachan Sadan, Ashoka Road, New Delhi Immedlately. The video footages have been shown by a number of News Channel in different districts/cities in the state. Therefore, Superintendents of police of all the districts are requested to intiate criminal action against Shri Narendra Modi & Others including the News Channel who had telecast the above said video footages. (3) A report regarding the action taken in this regard along with the copy of the First Information Report may be submitted directly to the Election Commission of India, Nirvachan Sadan, Ashoka Road, New Delhi under Itimation to this office before hrs, today. Copy for kind information to: (1) Chief secretary, Govt of Gujrat, (2) The Addl. Chief Secretary Home Department Govt. of Gujrat (3) Chief Election Officer Gujrat mijksdr i= tks vusdtkj ih & ;gfd] ekuuh; iz/kkuea=h Jh ujsaunz eksnh }kjk fnukad dks ntz,q-vkbz-vkj- ds laca/k esa fnukad dks lekpkj i= esa izdkf kr [kcj &^^Gujrat HC admits plea against PM s selfie with party symbol during polls. The Gujrat High Court has admitted a revision plea against Prime Minister Narendra Modi on Monday for alleged breach of t he election code of conduct by taking a selfie with the party symbol and briefing media in Ranip are of Ahmedabad on the last day of Lok Sabha Polls. The hearing on the case will be held on October 6. The High Court, however, recalled its previous order of issuing Rule in the selfie case following the state Government s statement that it would like to place various authorities to establish the lower court s decision of not accepting the demand to insert more charges against PM Modi for his alleged act was right. Advocate General Kamal Trivedi told the court that Gujrat Government should be given a chance to be heard before admitting the application, following which justice GR Udhwani recalled the court order. The State Government would argue its positions during the next hearing. Nishant Varma, a formaer member of Arvind Kejriwal s political outfit Aam Aadmi Party (AAP), had filed the revisaion application after the Chief Judicial Magistrate at Ahmedabad rural court on May 11 Junked his request for addition of charges against Modi Varma had demanded to add more charges apart from Section 126 of the Representation of People Act as directed by the EC. He wanted various provisions of IPC to be invoked against Modi He first approached the Ranip Police and then moved a court and challenged the closure report. Varma s plea was dismissed by the Chief Judicial Magistrate SR Singh and remarked that the Metropolitan Court had rightly unheld the closure report. On holding a Press confrence displaying BJP s symbol near polling booth on April 30,2014 the Election Commission had asked the State Government to book then Gujrat Cheif Minister Narendra Modi for breaching poll code. Later on a charge was framed against him. Following the investigation, it gave clean chit to the former Gujrat Chief Minister. mijksdr lekpkj i= ftl ij Hkkjr fuokzpu vk;ksx }kjk fy[kh xbz uksv khv fnukad ] tks vusdtj ih&275 87

88 266 ;gfd] Hkkjr fuokzpu vk;ksx ds ofj B iz/kku lfpo,oa izfke vihyh; vf/kdkjh }kjk lwpuk ds vf/kdkj ds rgr fxjh k kekz }kjk ekaxh xbz tkudkjh ds laca/k esa i= fnukad dks fy[kk fd &^^lqizhe dksvz ds ofj B vf/kodrk ls gkfkh dh ewfrz;ksa dks <dus laca/kh QSlys esa dksbz Hkh er izkir ugha fd;k x;k FkkA** tks vusdtj ih& ;gfd] Hkkjr fuokzpu vk;ksx ds ofj B iz/kku lfpo,oa izfke vihyh; vf/kdkjh }kjk lwpuk ds vf/kdkj ds rgr fxjh k kekz }kjk ekaxh xbz tkudkjh ds laca/k esa i= fnukad dks fy[kk fd &^^dsunzh; tu lwpuk vf/kdkjh ls vksj iwnrkn ds ckn ;g irk yxk fd lqizhe dksvz ds fnukad vksj ds vkns k ds ekeys s esa lqizhe dksvz ds odhy us dksbz jk; ugha nh FkhA** mijksdr tkudkjh dk i= fnukad dks Hkstk x;k tks vusdtj ih& ;gfd] Hkkjr fuokzpu vk;ksx ds ofj B iz/kku lfpo,oa izfke vihyh; vf/kdkjh }kjk lwpuk ds vf/kdkj ds rgr fxjh k kekz }kjk ekaxh xbz tkudkjh ds laca/k esa i= fnukad dks Hksts x;s nksuksa i= tks lwpuk ds vf/kdkj ds rgr ekaxh xbz tkudkjh fnukad ds vuqlkj pkgh xbz tkudkjh &^^¼v½ Jh jfo dkar }kjk fnukad dks Hkkjr fuokzpu vk;ksx dks Hksts x;s i= ds laca/k esa egkf/kodrk lokszpp U;k;ky; ubz fnyyh }kjk ^^gkfkhz dh ewfrz;k ** dks <dus laca/kh Hkkjr fuokzpu vk;ksx ds vkns k fnukad ds iwoz fof/kd lykg laca/kh i=@nlrkost dh izekf.kr izfrfyfia ¼c½ Jh jfo dkar }kjk lokszpp U;k;ky; esa izlrqr ;kfpdk k Øekad 226@2009 esa ikfjr vkns k ds laca/k esa fnukad dks Hkkjr fuokzpu vk;ksx }kjk ikfjr vkns k ds iwoz Hkkjr fuokzpu vk;ksx }kjk egkf/kodrk lokszpp U;k;ky; ubz fnyyh }kjk vkns k fnukad ds iwoz fof/kd lykg laca/kh i=@nlrkost dh izekf.kr izfrfyfia mijksdr vkosnu fnukad ds laca/k esa Jh ds-,qfoyýsm }kjk fnukad dks vius vkosnu esa mijksdr laca/k esa fdlh Hkh izdkj dh dksbz tkudkjh dh m-izfo/kku lhkk o kz 2012 esa vkj-ds- JhokLro }kjk fnukad dks ewfrz <dus dk vkns k lokszpp U;k;ky;] mpp U;k;ky; ds fdl vkns k ds rgr fn;k x;k mijksdr vkns k ij lokszpp U;k;ky; ds egkf/kodrk }kjk gkfkh dh ewfrz <dus ds iwoz dksbz Hkh fof/kd lykg ugha yh xbz D;ksafd bl izdkj dk dksbz Hkh vkns k Hkkjrh; lafo/kku ds vuqpnsn 14 ds rgr gkfkh dh ewfrz;ksa dks <dus ds laca/k esa fn;k gh ugha x;ka mijksdr vkns k dsoy fuokzpu vk;ksx }kjk fufezr fd;k x;k dwvjfpr QthZ vkns k fnukad FkkA ftlls lacaf/kr nlrkost dks fuokzpu vk;ksx fujarj nckus dk izr;uu dj xqejkg dj jgk lwpuk ds vf/kdkj ds rgr pkgh xbz tkudkjh fnukad vusdtj ih& ;gfd] Hkkjr fuokzpu vk;ksx ds ofj B iz/kku lfpo,oa izfke vihyh; vf/kdkjh }kjk lwpuk ds vf/kdkj ds rgr fxjh k kekz }kjk ekaxh xbz tkudkjh ds laca/k esa i= fnukad dks Hksts x;s nksuksa i= tks lwpuk ds vf/kdkj ds rgr ekaxh xbz tkudkjh fnukad ds vuqlkj pkgh xbz tkudkjh &^^¼,½ Hkkjr fuokzpu vk;ksx }kjk vkns k fnukad ds vk/kkj ij vkj-ds ds- JhokLro fizafliy lsøsvjh Hkkjr fuokzpu vk;ksx }kjk vkns k fnukad esa gkfkh dh ewfrz; k dh <dus laca/kh vkns k dk o kz 2017 fo/kkulhkk fuokzpu mrrj izns k esa iqu% ikyu gsrq ekuuh; egkf/kodrk lokszpp U;k;ky; ubz fnyyh ls yh xbz fof/kd lykg dh izekf.kr izfrfyfia ¼ch½ dk;kzy; eq[; fuokzpu vf/kdkjh mrrj izns k k y[kuå i= la[;k &158@lh-bZ bz-vks vks- &1-1-1@2017 1@2017 Vhlh y[kuå] fnukad dks iz/kku lfpo Hkkjr fuokzpu vk;ksx ubz fnyyh dks Hksts x;s i= ds laca/k esa ekuuh; egkf/kodrk lokszpp U;k;ky; ubz fnyyh ls fof/kd lykg gsrq Hksts x;s i= dh izekf.kr izfrfyfia ¼lh½ dk;kzy; eq[; fuokzpu vf/kdkjh mrrj izns k y[kuå i= la[;k &158@lh-bZ bz-vks vks-&1&7&1@2017 Vhlh y[kuå fnukad dks iz/kku lfpo Hkkjr fuokzpu vk;ksx ubz fnyyh dks Hksts x;s i= ds laca/k es Legal Advisor ls fof/kd lykg gsrq Hksts x;s i= dh izekf.kr izfrfyfia fia mijksdr vkosnu fnukad ds laca/k esa Jh ds-,q- foyýsm }kjk fnukad dks vius vkosnu esa mijksdr laca/k esa fdlh Hkh izdkj dh dksbz tkudkjh dh m-iz- fo/kku lhkk o kz 2012 esa vkj-ds- JhokLro }kjk fnukad dks ewfrz <dus dk vkns k lokszpp U;k;ky;] mpp U;k;ky; ds fdl vkns k ds rgr fn;k x;k mijksdr vkns k ij lokszpp U;k;ky; ds egkf/kodrk }kjk gkfkh dh ewfrz <dus ds iwoz dksbz Hkh fof/kd lykg ugha yh xbz D;ksafd bl izdkj dk dksbz Hkh vkns k Hkkjrh; lafo/kku ds vuqpnsn 14 ds rgr gkfkh dh ewfrz;ksa dks <dus ds laca/k esa fn;k gh ugha x;ka mijksdr vkns k dsoy fuokzpu vk;ksx }kjk fufezr fd;k x;k dwvjfpr QthZ vkns k fnukad FkkA ftlls lacaf/kr nlrkost dks fuokzpu vk;ksx fujarj nckus dk izr;uu dj xqejkg dj jgk lwpuk ds vf/kdkj ds rgr pkgh xbz tkudkjh fnukad vusdtj ih& ;gfd] Hkkjr fuokzpu vk;ksx ds ofj B iz/kku lfpo,oa izfke vihyh; vf/kdkjh }kjk lwpuk ds vf/kdkj ds rgr fxjh k kekz }kjk ekaxh xbz tkudkjh ds laca/k esa i= fnukad dks Hksts x;s nksuksa i= tks lwpuk ds vf/kdkj ds rgr ekaxh xbz tkudkjh fnukad ds vuqlkj pkgh xbz tkudkjh &^^¼,½ Jh jfodkar,moksdsv }kjk fnukad dks Hksts x;s i= ds laca/k esa] Hkkjr fuokzpu vk;ksx fuokzpu lnu ubz fnyyh }kjk ekuuh; egkf/kodrk lokszpp U;k;ky; ubz fnyyh ls fof/kd lykg gsrq yh xbz fof/kd lykg ;k Legal Advisor }kjk yh xbz fof/kd lykg dh izekf.kr izfrfyfia ¼ch½ Jh vkj-ds ds- JhokLro fizafliy lsøsvjh] Hkkjr fuokzpu vk;ksx ds vkns k Øekad &464@;w-ih fnukad nsus ds d s iwoz ekuuh; egkf/kodrk lokszpp U;k;ky; ubz fnyyh ls fof/kd lykg gsrq yh xbz fof/kd lykg ;k Legal Advisor }kjk yh xbz fof/kd lykg dh izekf.kr izfrfyfia mijksdr vkosnu fnukad ds laca/k esa Jh ds-,q- foyýsm }kjk fnukad dks vius vkosnu esa mijksdr laca/k esa fdlh Hkh izdkj dh dksbz tkudkjh dh m-iz- fo/kku lhkk o kz 2012 esa vkj-ds- JhokLro }kjk fnukad dks ewfrz <dus dk vkns k lokszpp U;k;ky;] mpp 88

89 U;k;ky; ds fdl vkns k ds rgr fn;k x;k mijksdr vkns k ij lokszpp U;k;ky; ds egkf/kodrk }kjk gkfkh dh ewfrz <dus ds iwoz dksbz Hkh fof/kd lykg ugha yh xbz D;ksafd bl izdkj dk dksbz Hkh vkns k Hkkjrh; lafo/kku ds vuqpnsn 14 ds rgr gkfkh dh ewfrz;ksa dks <dus ds laca/k esa fn;k gh ugha x;ka mijksdr vkns k dsoy fuokzpu vk;ksx }kjk fufezr fd;k x;k dwvjfpr QthZ vkns k fnukad FkkA ftlls lacaf/kr nlrkost dks fuokzpu vk;ksx fujarj nckus dk izr;uu dj xqejkg dj jgk lwpuk ds vf/kdkj ds rgr pkgh xbz tkudkjh fnukad vusdtj ih& ;gfd] uhjt kadj ldlsuk y[kuå }kjk fnukad dks Hkkjr fuokzpu vk;ksx dks Hksts x;s vius i= esa fy[kk fd&^^application for deciding the Representation dated 7 th January, 2017, in pursuance of Judgement dated passed by Hon ble Allahabad High Court, Lucknow Bench un W.P. 870 (MB) 2017 (Neeraj Shaker Saxena v. Election Commission of India). (1) That I had send a n application to you on 7 th January, 2017 through Registered Post, on 8 th January, 2017 through and a copy of the same was got received in your office on 9 th January No steps to consider the said application has been taken so for at your end. (2) That to maintain the purity in ensuing U.P. Vidhan Sabha elections (2017) it is necessary that appeal being made by political parties and candidates arousing the feelings of the Muslim community be restrained with iron hand exercising all the powers wasted in the Commission under Article 324 of the Constitution of India and 11 Provisions in this regard. (3) That once a political party or parties are allowed to seek votes to consolidate muslims, the reaction is bound to take place in Hindu Community. Therefore, to maintain the majesty of law and the judgement passed by the Apex Court in Abiram Singh in C.D. Commachen, decided on (Judgement available on website) it is necessary that the Commission may come heavily against all those who indulge in communal politics and try to seek muslim votes in the name of their religion and further to communicate them that their future is saved only with that party or t hat it will give special treatment to them, if come to power. (4) That the very purpose of in acting Section 29-A (5) of R.P. Act is frustrated as soon as the political party is allowed to violate the solemn declaration given by it for registration under the said provisions. (5) That Bahujan Samaj Party is a recognized National Party but its president Ms. Mayawati has circulated a Booklet appealing Muslims to vote in favour of her party and further in Press Conference organized on at Lucknow and on at New Delhi she had openly asked muslims to vote in faour of her party. (6) That in Election in fact every political party is itself a candidate with a meaning of Section 123 of Representation of People Act, 1951, being mother of all candidates. The government is formed after the elections. Therefore the mischief done i.e. seeking vote on the basis of religion will turninto the formation of a non-secular government tilt towards a particular religion and thus the noble words written in the Constitution and the concept of the equality of the law would remain silent golden words not to be implemented in the practice. (7) That I have already sent the booklet being circulated by BSP alongwith application dated 7 th January, I am sending a Compact Disc (CD) containing press conference held by Ms. Mayawati on at New Delhi and at Lucknow for evaluating the gravity of the matter. Am also sending copy of Judgement dt passed by Hon ble High Court, referred to above. mijksdr i= fnukad vusdtj ih& ;gfd] cgqtu lektoknh ikvhz ds jk Vªh; lfpo Jh lrh kpunz fejk }kjk fnukad dks Hkkjr fuokzpu vk;ksx dks fy[ks x;s vius i= esa dgk fd&^^hon ble High Court order in the matter of W.P. (C) No. 8363/2010 Common Cause Vs Bahujan Smaj Party-regarding, seeking suggestions/views of the Political Parties. Letter No. 56/4/2015/LET/FUNC/PP/PPS-II/2016 dated 9 th Septeber, (1) The present judgment of Hon ble Delhi High Court arises out of the Writ Petition (C) No of 2010 which was filed by Common Cause, a registered Society thereby challenging the order of the Election Commission of India dated by means of which it had dismissed the application filed against BSP for freezing its Symbol (Elephant) as a reserved symbol of the party, which is recognized as a National Party within the meaning of clause 6 & 6A of the Election Symbols (Reservation and Allotment) Order, 1968 (hereinafter to be referred as Symbol Order ). (2) In a complaint filed before the ECI it was alleged that the then Government of State of Uttar Pradesh which was being run by BSP had erected replicas of symbols of BSP (Elephant) and statues of its political leaders of permanent nature by using public funds in public places and had therefore violated the Model Code of Conduct and was accordingly liable for freezing of it symbol. (3) The ECI vide its detailed order dated had rejected the application of the complainant as being not maintainable holding therein that Model Code of Conduct is applicable during the election period and as no action of erecting such symbol or statues of permanent nature was done during the said period therefore it cannot be held that any violation of Model Code of Conduct has been committed. Several other reasons were also recorded for rejecting the application as not maintainable. (4) Hon ble Delhi High Court vide its above judgement dated has not agreed to set aside the above of Election Commission of India as was prayed by the petitioners therein and while doing so it has been held that as ECI under the Symbol order has no power to withdraw/freeze an election symbol one allotted or reserved for a recognized political party and it can only be done in the loss of recognition by the potitical party. It has also been held that no political party can be taken by a surprise if nothing has been provided in the symbols order providing any action against the party. Parahraph 28 of the Judgment if reproduced:- 28. I therefore hold that there is no power in ECI under the Symbols Order, to withdraaw/freeze an election symbol once allotted and/or reserved for a recognised political Party and the only manner in which the symbol one allotted/reserved is lost; is on loss of recoginition. Though the powers of ECI otherwise flow 89

90 from Article 324 of Constitution of India and are plenary but ECI, in exercise of such powers having promulgated the Symbols Order and having therein not provided for such eventuality, the same, in my opinion, cannot be sprung as a surprise. (5) In paragragh 31 of the judgment it has upheld contention of the ECI that the Model Code of Conduct is applicable only during the election period and not otherwise. It has been further held in the same paragraph that after perusing the ECI order issued from time to time with regard to DO s and DO NTs and also Model Code of Conduct for guidance of the political parties and candidates no defiance of the same has been made by the BSP. The finding of paragraph 31 is reproduced hereunder:- 31. ECI in the impugned order had held that Model Code of Conduct is applicable only during the election and not otherwise. No dent to the said reasoning of ECI has been made by the petitioner. As far as the other ground for withdrawal of recognition accorded to a political party prescribed in Clause 16A supra is concerned, though I have perused the-handbook for Candidates/published by ECI in 2007 and also the Compendium of instructions on Model Code of Conduct/published by ECI on 21 st August, 2015 as available on the website of ECI but I am unable to find any instruction/guideline prescribed prohibiting the conduct of which the petitioner accuses the respondent BSP and for defiance of which it can be said that ECI ought to have initicated proceedings for withdrawal of recognition of the respondent BSP. (6) Again in pargraph 33 the Hon ble Delhi High Court has held as under:- 33. I am of the view that since ECI till now has not issued any express direction or instruction prohibiting recognised political parties from doing what the respondent BSP should not be caught unaware and no case for proceeding against respondent BSP for withdrawal of recognition is made out. (7) However, after concluding and holding that no case is made out against BSP for withdrawal of recognition as till date there are no such directions or instructions issued by the ECI prohibiting recognition of Political parties from doing what BSP was accused of having done the Hon ble High Court felt that the ECI should however now look into he matter for issuing guidelines to be followed in future by political so as to avoid any complaint of the nature being made by anyone in future. Paragraph 34 of the judgment is reproduced hereunder:- 34. I am however of the vie that there indeed is a need for ECI to now, that the lacuna has been detected and has complained of having been exploited, to consider issuing issuing express directions in this regard so that no political party in power can exploit the same in future. There can be no doubt of the power of ECI to issue such a direction. I direct accordingly. 35. That will however take care only of the future. The question of the installations already made by the repondent BSP continuing to given an undue advantage to the respondent BSP in future elections remains. I am of the view that covering thereor during the elections does not undo what they are capable of doing. The size of the said installations, visible from surrounding areas, even though covered, continue to remind the public of what lies beneath. In fact a covered installation is more of a reminder and has a higher impacr capable of influencing. I am unable to agree with the senior counsel for respondent BSP that the loss suffered in elections is proof of the same having no influence. A failed attempt does not wash away the wrong means adopted to succeed. Just like irrespective of the party in power coming back to power or not, its violation of the directions already issued would r ender it liable for withdrawal of recognition, so is the position here. (8) In this manner so far as the issue which was before the Hon ble Delhi High Court was settled to t he extent that no action can be taken against BSP for the allegations made against it. However, Hon ble High Court has thereafter directed that the ECI should consider framing of certain guidelines or issuing directions which should be followed in future by all polititcal parties in power so that such complaints do not arise in future. (9) In the light of the above whatever guidelines or instructions would now to be considerd by the ECI for being issued to be followed by political parties in power have to be made operative and effetive for future. Having stated aas above as the ECI has sought the suggestions of all political parties on the issue, it is submitted as under: (i) While issuin any directions under section 16A of the Election Symbols (Reservation and Allotment) Order 1968 it will have to be kept into consideration that as per the preamble of the Symbol Orders the said order has been issued for the purpose of reservation, choice and allotment of symbols at election in parliamentary and assembly constituencies, for the recognition of political parties in relation thereto and for matters connected therewith. The said Symbol order has been issued while exercising the power under Article 326 read with Section 29 (A) of the Representation of People s Act and Rules 5& 10 of the Conduct of Elections Rules, It is therefore, required to be taken into consideration whether the ECI can forbid any elected soverign Government in State or Centre from exercising its legislative power from doing any such act which is sought to be prohibited as per the observations of Hon ble Delhi High Court in the light of the Constitution Bench Judgments in the case of Ram jawaya Kapoor Vs State of Punjab 1955 (2) SCR 225 (Paragraphs 12, 15 & 16) and Bhim Singh Vs Union of India & Ors. (2010) 10 SCC 538 (Pargraph 58). (ii) There is a distinction between the Government and Political Parties. It is not necessary that the Government in power in a particular State of at Centre may be of one political party as it may have formed by combination/support of more than one political party and, therefore, an direction if is to be issued as per suggestion of the Hon ble High Court, the same will have to be issue mainly to the Government in power in State or Centre. As within the legislature the power is exercised not only by the Party/Parties in power but there may be several decisions which may be unanimous in nature having sanction of the entire legislature. (iii) Havding said as aobve, it is submitted that so far as the BSP is concerned, it has already been specifically and conclusively held that it has not violated any existing orders of the Commission or any Statues when it was in power in the State of U.P. between 2007 to 2012 and, therefore, no action is called for any action taken during thye said period. However, it is submitted that in case the 90

91 Commission issues any fresh guidlines or instructions to be followed by all political parties is future whenever they are in power in regard to the subject matter, all such directions/ orders would be duly followed by the BSP whenever it cames in power. (iv ) Even as per judgment of the Hon ble Delhi High Court any guidelines if are issued in regard to the subject matter by the ECI have to be operative for any future actions and not for any past actions when there was no such guideline or instructions. mijksdr i= fnukad vusdtj ih& ;gfd] lwpuk ds vf/kdkj ds rgr fnukad dks dsunzh; x`gea=ky; dks vkosnu fn;k x;k ftldk tckc Hkkjr fuokzpu vk;ksx }kjk fnukad dks fn;k x;k&^^ ekaxh xbz lwpuk nh xbz lwpuk ekuuh; lfpo x`g ea=ky; Hkkjr ljdkj] ubz fnyyh dks fy[ks x;s i= fo k;&bafm;u us kuy dkaxzsl ikvhz dks vkcafvr gkfk dk iatk pquko fpug }kjk Hkkjrh; lafo/kku ds vuqpnsn 14 fof/k ds le{k lekurk,oa yksdrkaf=d izfø;k ds rgr gkfk dk iatk fuokzpu izfr fujlr djus ckcr izkfkhz }kjk fnukad dks Hksts x;s i= dh izekf.kr izfrfyfia izkfkhz }kjk Hksts x;s i= fnukad esa lfpo x`g ea=ky; Hkkjr ljdkj] ubz fnyyh }kjk vkosnu ij dh xbz fohkkxh; dk;zokgh o Vhi lfgr nlrkostksa dh izekf.kr izfrfyfia izkfkhz }kjk Hksts x;s i= fnukad esa dk;kzy; lfpo x`g ea=ky; Hkkjr ljdkj] ubz fnyyh }kjk vkosnu ij dh xbz dk;zokgh dh izekf.kr izfrfyfia mrrj en la[;k 1] 2,oa 3 ds lanhkz esa bl laca/k esa vkidks lwfpr fd;k tkrk gs fd mdr fnukafdr i= i= ekuuh; lfpo x`g ea=ky; Hkkjr ljdkj] ubz fnyyh }kjk dh xbz dk;zokgh dh lwpuk pquko vk;ksx esa miyc/k ugha gsaa rfkfi vkidks lwfpr fd;k tkrk gs fd vkidks fnukad ds i= ij vk;ksx }kjk dh xbz dk;zokgh dh lwpuk vkidks v/kksglrk{kjh ds fnukad o ds i= la[;k 4@vkj-Vh-vkbZ-@11@2017@,y-bZVh@,Q- ;w-,u-lh-@ih-ih-@ih-ih-,l&ii }kjk nh tk pqdh gs vki dì;k mldk lanhkz ysaa lkfk gh vki dk /;ku dsunzh; lwpuk vk;ksx ds lwpuk dh iqujko`fr ds laca/k esa tkjh fnukad ds vkns k la- CIC/AD/A/2013/ SAdh vksj vkdf kzr fd;k tkrk gs ftlds rgr lwpuk dh iqujko`fr ij lwpuk nsus ls badkj djus dk izko/kku fd;k x;k mijksdr i= fnukad vusdtj ih& ;gfd] lwpuk ds vf/kdkj ds rgr fnukad dks dsunzh; x`gea=ky; dks vkosnu fn;k x;k ftldk tckc Hkkjr fuokzpu vk;ksx }kjk fnukad dks fn;k x;k&^^ ekaxh xbz lwpuk nh xbz lwpuk Government of India Ministry of Home Affarirs (CS mrrj en la[;k,],oa ch ds lanhkz esa Division) }kjk fuokzpu vk;ksx }kjk Hkkjr ljdkj dks bl laca/k esa vkidks lwfpr fd;k tkrk gs fd mdr fy[ks x;s vius i= fnukad ds }kjk in fnukafdr i= i= ekuuh; lfpo x`g Øekad 2 Letter dated received from Shri ea=ky; Hkkjr ljdkj] ubz fnyyh }kjk dh xbz Girish Sharma, 781 Kailash Bihar Colony, City Centre, dk;zokgh dh lwpuk pquko vk;ksx esa miyc/k ugha Gwalior (M.P.) Subject Reg, the Cancellation of Hand gssaa rfkfi vkidks lwfpr fd;k tkrk gs fd vkidks Symbol. dh izfr vkosnu ds lkfk layxu izkfkhz }kjk fnukad ds vkosnu dh izekf.k izfrfyfia izkfkhz }kjk fnukad dks fn;s x;s mdr vkosnu ij Hkkjr fuokzpu vk;ksx }kjk dh xbz dk;zokgh ds vkns k dh izekf.kr izfrfyfia fnukad ds i= ij vk;ksx }kjk dh xbz dk;zokgh dh lwpuk vkidks v/kksglrk{kjh ds fnukad o ds i= la[;k 4@vkj-Vh-vkbZ-@11@2017@,y-bZVh@,Q-;w-,ulh-@ih-ih-@ih-ih-,l&II }kjk nh tk pqdh gs vki dì;k mldk lanhkz ysaa lkfk gh vki dk /;ku dsunzh; lwpuk vk;ksx ds lwpuk dh iqujko`fr ds laca/k esa tkjh fnukad ds vkns k la- CIC/AD/A/2013/ SAdh vksj vkdf kzr fd;k tkrk gs ftlds rgr lwpuk dh iqujko`fr ij lwpuk nsus ls badkj djus dk izko/kku fd;k x;k mijksdr i= fnukad vusdtj ih& ;gfd] Hkkjr ljdkj x`g ea=ky; dks fnukad ,oa dks fn;s x;s vkosnuksa ds vk/kkj ij lwpuk ds vf/kdkj ds rgr dgk x;k fd&^^as per the records available in this office your earlier application dated was sent to Election Commission of India vide this Office Memorandum No. IV/16011/20/2014- CSR-II dated (copy enclosed) for necessary action. Your RTI application dated is also being transferred to Election Commission of India under the provision of Section 6 (3) of RTI Act 2005 for appropriate action. It is requested that you may contact the above mentioned authority for further information in this regard. mijksdr i= fnukad vusdtj ih& ;gfd] Hkkjr ljdkj x`g ea=ky; }kjk Hksts x;s lwpuk ds vf/kdkj ds rgr vkosnu fnukad ds laca/k esa tkudkjh&^^ 91

92 Name of petitioners/date of petition Subject Letter dated received from Shri Girish Reg. the cancellation of Hand Symbol. Sharma, 781 Kailash Bihar Colony, City Centre, Gwalior, M.P. mijksdr i= fnukad vusdtj ih& ;gfd] Hkkjr fuokzpu vk;ksx ls fnukad dks pkgh xbz tkudkjh ds laca/k esa fnukad dks Hksts x;s vkosnu esa fy[kk x;k fd&^^ ekaxh xbz lwpuk nh xbz lwpuk Hkkjr fuokzpu vk;ksx }kjk bafm;u us kuty dkaxzsl mrrj en la[;k 1,oa 2& ikvhz dks vkacfvr gkfk ds iats fuokzpu fpug ds bl laca/k esa vkidks lwfpr fd;k tkrk gs fd vkidk fo:) lokszpp U;k;ky; esa izlrqr ;kfpdk ftlesa iz u iwjh rjg ls Li V ugha gs rfkk vkius fdlh okn Hkkjr fuokzpu dks i{kdkj cuk;k gks] mdr ;kfpdk la[;k dk myys[k ugha fd;k gs ftlds laca/k esa esa izlrqr tckc fu.kz; vkns k ds ikyu esa dh xbz lwpuk pkgh mdr ds vkyksd esa fdlh Hkh izdkj dk;zokgh dh izekf.kr izfrfyfi;kaa dh lwpuk miyc/k djk ikuk lahko ugha Hkkjr fuokzpu vk;ksx ds fo:) vkcafvr fuokzpu izrhd ds fo:) izlrqr ;kfpdk esa ikfjr vkns k dh izekf.kr izfrfyfi;k A Hkkjr fuokzpu vk;ksx }kjk fdlh ikvhz ds fuokzpu bl laca/k esa vkidksa lwfpr fd;k tkrk gs fd Hkkjr fpug dks fujlr fd;k x;k gks rks Hkkjr fuokzpu fuokzpu vk;ksx esa fdlh ikvhz ds vkjf{kr izrhd dks vk;ksx ds mdr vkns k dh izekf.kr izfrfyfi;k A fujlr djus laca/kh dksbz lwpuk miyc/k ugha mijksdr i= fnukad vusdtj ih& ;gfd] Hkkjr fuokzpu vk;ksx ls fnukad dks pkgh xbz tkudkjh ds laca/k esa fnukad dks Hksts x;s vkosnu esa fy[kk x;k fd&^^ vk;ksx esa jk Vªh; dkaxzsl ikvhz ds uke ls dksbz ny iathd`r ugha bafm;u us kuy dkaxzsl ls gs rks bl ikvhz dks dks ^gkfk* pquko fpug vk;ksxa lacaf/kr fjv isfv ku ds lanhkz esa gkbzdksvz ds vkns k ds i pkr~ vk;ksx }kjk dks vkns k ikfjr fd;k x;k yasfdu lacaf/kr QkbZy vhkh vk;ksx esa [kkth ugha tk ldh vr% MCY;w-ih ih- 266@09,l-lh lh- ds ikyu esa fn;s x;s fn kk funsz k tksa lacaf/kr Qkby esa gh gs] miyc/k ugha djk;s tk ldrs mijksdr i= fnukad vusdtj ih& ;gfd] fnukad dks eq[;ky; tu lwpuk vuqhkkx Lekjdksa] laxzgky;ksa] lalfkkvksa] ikdksz o miouksa vkfn dh izca/ku] lqj{kk,oa vuqj{k.k lfefr y[kuå ls ekaxh xbz tkudkjh ds laca/k esa fnukad dks Hksts x;s vkosnu esa fy[kk x;k fd&^^lacaf/kr fcanqvkas ds laca/k esa dksbz vfhkys[k@lwpuk gekjs dk;kzy; esa miyc/k ugha ftlesa Lekjdks] laxzgky;ksa] llfkkvksa] ikdksz esa j[kh gqbz gkfkh dh ewfrz;ksa ls lacaf/kr ernku dsunz dh nwjh ds laca/k esa tkudkjh pkgh xbza mijksdr tkudkjh vkt fnukad rd ugha nh xbz mijksdr i= fnukad vusdtj ih& ;gfd] Hkkjr fuokzpu vk;ksx ds vkns k fnukad ds ikyu esa ftykvf/kdkjh ftyk fuokzpu vf/kdkjh xksrecq)uxj }kjk & ^^xksrecq) fo o fo ky; esa LFkkfir ekuuh; eq[;ea=h th dh 02 izfrekvksa dks <d fn;k x;k ] lwjtiqj,avªh ikwb.v ij 4 gkffk;ksa dh ewfrz;ksa dks <d fn;k x;k ] MkW0 Hkhejko vecsmdj ikdz] cknyiqj esa 1 ekuuh; eq[;ea=h th dh izfrek,oa 16 gkffk;ksa dh ewfrz;ksa dks <d fn;k x;k ] xksrecq) ikdz cknyiqj esa 16 gkffk;ksa dh ewfrz;ksa dks <d fn;k x;k ] uks,mk ikdz esa LFkkfir gkfkh,oa vu; fof k V ewfrz;ksa dk fooj.k fueuor gs] ftugsa <dk x;k gs&1- eq[; Mkse&ekuuh; eq[;ea=h] m-iz- ljdkj dh ewfrz dks IykbZ ls <d fn;k x;k ] Mkse ds vanj yxk;s x;s E;wjy <d fn;s x;s ] Mkse ds vanj nhokjksa ij gkffk;ksa ds fhkfrfpa= Hkh ikwyhfkhu ls <d fn;s x;s 2- gkfkh xsyjh& LFky ij LFkkfir 20u- NksVs gkffk;ksa dh ewfrz ds fo:) 20 gkfkh xqykch ikwyhfkhu ls <ds tk pqds 3- ifjlj us LFkkfir 14 u- NksVs gkffk;ksa dh ewfrz;ksa dks <d fn;k x;k 4- QkmUVsu&QkmUVsu esa LFkkfir 16 ua- czkst ds gkfkh LFkkfir gs] tks <ds tk pqds gs QkmUVsu esa LFkkfir 16 xteq[; dks <d fn;k x;k 5- dkwye Iyktk& dkwyu Iyktk ij LFkkfir ekuuh; eq[;ea=h m-iz- dh czket dh ewfrz dks IykbZ ls <d fn;k x;k Iyktk ds e/; esa yxhkx 125 QhV Å pkbz ds izrhd LrEHk ds Åij 22QhV Å ps o 30 QhV yecs 04 ua gkfkh dh izfrek;sa LFkkfir bu NksVh izfrekvksa dks Hkh <dus dk iz;kl fd;k x;k] ijarq Qk;j lfozl ds gkbmªksfyd IysVQkeZ dh lgk;rk yh xbz] ijarq bldh igaqap 60 QhV gksus ds dkj.k <duk lehko u gks ldka KkrO; gks fd mdr gkfkh dh izfrek;sa pgkjnhokjh ls 85 ehvj ¼280 QhV½ ij flfkr gs,oa ogka ls budh vkd`fr fn[kkbz ugha nsrh gs lkfk gh ;g ikdz dfri; ejeer] dk;ksz ds izxfr esa gksus ds QyLo:i vhkh lkeku; tuekul gsrq [kksyk Hkh ugha x;k 6- v kksdu dkwye& dqy 26 v kksdu LrEHk ij LFkkfir xteq[k <ds tk pqds 7- vecsmdj LVsP;w LFky%& LFky ij LFkkfir 4 ua xteq[k <dus dk dk;z iw.kz fd;k tk pqdk mijksdr i= fnukad vusdtj ih& ;gfd] ftyk fuokzpu vf/kdkjh xksrecq)uxj ls fnukad dks pkgh xbz tkudkjh ds laca/k esa fnukad dks Hksts x;s vkosnu esa fy[kk x;k fd&^^ iz u vk[;k o kz 2012 ls 2017 rd ftyk fuokzpu vf/kdkjh] o kz 2012 ls 2017 rd ftyk fuokzpu vf/kdkjh] xksrecq)uxj] m-iz- dks fn;s x;s vkosnu ftlesa xksrecq)uxj] m-iz- dks fdlh ds }kjk,slk vkosnu 92

93 gkfk dk iatk fujlr djus gsrq dgk x;k gs] ugha fn;k x;k ftlesa gkfk dk iatk fujlr djus gsrq mijksdr lelr vkosnuksa dh izekf.kr izfrfyfia dgk x;k gksa mijksdr i= fnukad vusdtj ih& ;gfd] jkt; fuokzpu vk;ksx xka/khuxj dks fn;k x;k vkosnu&^^v&fu kku lsdsumjh Ldwy] iksfyax cwfk xka/kh uxj ¼xqtjkr½ esa le; 8%30 feuv ij ekuuh; ujsunz eksnh }kjk ernku dsunz esa Hkk-tk-ik- dk pquko fpug yxkdj tkus,oa mdr pquko fpug lfgr lsyqh ysus ds laca/k esa jkt; fuokzpu vk;ksx xka/kh uxj] xqtjkr }kjk ntz djus gsrq fn;s x;s vkosnu dh izekf.kr izfrfyfia c& ekuuh; Jh ujsunz eksnh th ds f[kykq iathc),q-vkbz-vkj- dh izekf.kr izfrfyfi,oa mdr vijk/k esa fuokzpu vk;ksx }kjk dh xbz dk;zokgh vkmzj khv izekf.kr izfra mijksdr vkosnu fnukad vusdtj ih& ;gfd] Hkkjr fuokzpu vk;ksx ds ofj B iz/kku lfpo,oa izfke vihyh; vf/kdkjh Jh ds-,q- foyýsm }kjk Hksth xbz izfke vihy fnukad esa dgk fd&^^fd lacaf/kr Qkby dks mfpr iz;kl ds ckotwn vk;ksx ds fjdkwmz esa <wa<k ugha tk ldk ;g Qkby vhkh Hkh vizkir dsunzh; tu lwpuk vf/kdkjh ds }kjk lacaf/kr Qkby <wa<us dk iqu% iz;kl fd;k x;k ijarq mdr Qkby [kksth ugha tk ldha pwafd lacaf/kr Qkby [kksth ugha tk ldrh gs vr% bl flfkfr esa dksbz funsz k ugha fn;k tk ldrka tks vusdtj ih& ;gfd] Hkkjr fuokzpu vk;ksx ds vkns k ij mrrj izns k fo/kkulhkk pquko ds iwoz <dh xbz ewfrz;ksa ds lekpkj i= Xokfy;j ubznqfu;k fnukad dh izfr tks vusdtj ih& ;gfd] bafm;u us kuy dkaxzsl ¼vkbZ½ }kjk fuokzpu vk;ksx dks Hkstk x;k i= &^^Application to the Election Commission for registration of the Indian Nation Congress (I) as a political party for the purpose of the Representation of the People Act, 1951 as prescribed by Section 29A of Part IV A inserted by Sector 6 of the Representation of the People Amendment Act, (a) The name of the association or body (Political Party)- The Indian National Congress (I). (b) The state in which its head office is situated- Union Territory of Delhi. (c) The address to which letters and other communications for it should be sent - 24, Akbar Road, NEW Delhi (d) The names of its President, Secretary, Treasurer and other office bearers, -Shri Rajiv Gandhi President. II. The policies, aims and objects it pursues or or seeks to pursue. They are set out in Article I and Article II A of the Constitution of the Party, said Articles are reproduced below: The object of Indian National Congree is the well-being and advancement in Indian, by peaceful and constitutional means, of a Socialist State based on Parliamentary Democracy in which there is equality of opportunity and of political, economic and social rights and which aims at world peace and fellowship. II A The Indian National Congress bears ture faith and allegiance to the Consitution of India as a by law established and to the principles of socialism, secularism and democracy and would uphold the sovereignty, unity and integrity of India. III. Its programmes, functions and activities for the purpose of carrying either political Principle, policies aims and objects- The Indian National Congress had the the proud privilege of leading India s struggle for Freedom. After Independence the party has been carrying on relentless sturggle for the well being and advancement of the people of Indian and in pursuit of its aims and ideals enshrined in its constitution. It has invariably been voted to power by the people of India at the Centre and in most States, except for a short interregnum between March aiming at upliftment of the downtrodden, the in-dustrial workers and the agricultural labour and ensuring to them euqality of status and opportunity irrespective of caste, creed, religion or Sex; it has zealously preserved protected and defended the unity, integrity and souvereignty of India, it has striven to ameliorate the social and economic lot of the Scheduled Tribes; it has protected the rights of the minorities; it has endeavoured to safeguard the rights of women and ensure to them equality of status and rights with those of men in all spheres of social, economic, political and cultural life, it has made the public sector a mighty bastion of the Indian economy; it has secured to the youth their rightful place in India s social and political life towards which and it initiated and brought about Constitutional amendment lowering the voting age from 21 to 18 and is constantly endeavouring to channelise their youthful energy into the process of building a new vibrant and prosperous India. Through its foreign policy measures, unternational conferences etc. it has been carrying on vigorous struggle against colonialism and apatheid and has been striving to strenghten the forces of SOVERIGN SOCIALIST AND SECULAR DEMOCRATIC REPUBLIC and to secure to all its citizens: JUSTICE : Social, Economic and Political; LIBERTY of thought, expression, belief, faith and worship; EQUALITY of status and of opportunity; and to promote among the all FRATERNITY assuring the dignity of the individual and the (unity and Integrity of the Nation).It has now launched upon the crusade of a Constitutional revolutio of transmission of power to the people at the grassroots of power to the people at the grassroots to shape their social and economic destiny for a better future through the istrumentality of village Panchayats and Nagarpalikas and to make those bodies the backbone of democracy in India. At the Organizational level, the Party carries on its activities through public about the glorious density of India which is striving hard to break free from the opperssive legacy of colonial exploitation in the past and to rise to the full stature of her greatness, her ancient sublime heritage and rightful place in the modern comity of nations at peace amongst themselves. IV. The names of the main organs of the party, their functions, and the names of the Chairmn and other members of such organs. The Indian National Congress won overwhelming majority in General Elections to the Lok Sabha and in all the State Assemblies, barring rare exception, in 1952, 1957, 1962, In 1967, it won confortable majority in Lok Sabha and in most Statses. In 1980 and 1984, it won overwhelming majority both in the Lok Sabha and in various States 93

94 Assemblies. These electroal victories bear eloquent tsetimony to the consisten, overwhelming confidence and faith reposed by the people of India in the Indian National Cogress (I). tks vusdtj ih& ;gfd] nsfud HkkLdj lekpkj i= fnukad dks izdkf kr lekpkj &^^pquko lq/kkjksa ij csrqdsiu dk inkz esa fy[kk x;k fd gkfkh dh ewfrz;ksa dks m-iz- fo/kkulhkk fuokzpu ds le; <ds tkus dk vkns k D;k fuokzpu vk;ksx dk Fkk ;k lrrk:<+ ikvhz dkaxzsl dk Fkk gkfkh dh ewfrz;ksa dks <dus dk mìs ; D;k jktuhfrd Fkk ;k ikvhzxr ewfrz;ksa dks <dus ls D;k vkpkj pquko lafgrk dk ikyu gqvk\ ;gka flqz fuokzpu fpug gkfkh dh ewfrz;ksa dk Fkk ;k pquko fpug dk gs\ D;k gkfk] lkbfdy] ykyvsu] dey ds Qwy ij Hkh izfrca/k yxk;s tk;saxs\ D;k lhkh dkaxzslh meehnokj vius gkfkksa esa nlrkus igudj izpkj izlkj o ernku djsaxs\ bl izdkj ds ukvdh; fu.kz; kk;n vnkyr ds lkeus dhkh ugha fvd ik;sa\ pquko vk;ksx rks ogka rd pyk x;k fd mlus ewfrz;ks adks <dus ds fy;s dkys] yky vksj uhys jax dh euk gh dj nh D;ksafd dqn ikfvz;kas ds >.Ms Hkh bugh jaxksa ds D;k lq/kkjks ds uke ij fn;k x;k fu.kz; lgh Fkk ;k jktuhfrda fuokzpu vk;ksx ds mdr fu.kz; ls dsoy o kz 2012 es gh ewfrz;ksa dks D;ksa <dk x;k o kz 2014 esa yksdlhkk pquko esa mijksdr ewfrz;ksa dks D;ksa ugha <dk x;k o kz 2017 esa m-iz- fo/kku lhkk fuokzpu vk;ksx }kjk ;g mdr vkns k dk ikyu D;ksa ugha fd;k x;ka fuokzpu vk;ksx }kjk o kz 2012 esa gkfkh dh ewfrz;ksa dks <dus ds vkns k fnukad ds vkns k esa dgk x;k fd fnukad ds lka; 5 cts rd lelr gkfkh dh ewfrz;ksa dks <d fn;k tk;sa mijksdr vkns k esa dgk x;k fd mdr vkns k lokszpp U;k;ky; ds vuqikyuk esa Hkkjrh; lafo/kku ds vuqpnsn 14,oa vkn kz vkpkj pquko lafgrk ds ikyu esa gkffk;ksa dh ewfrz;ksa dks <dus dk vkns k fn;k x;ka tcfd vkt fnukad rd mpp U;k;ky;] lokszpp U;k;ky; }kjk,slk dksbz Hkh vkns k gkffk;ksa dh ewfrz;ksa dks fo/kkulhkk fuokzpu o kz 2012 esa <ds tkus ds laca/k esa ugha fn;k x;ka mijksdr vkns k euekuk O;fDrxr,oa jktuhfr ls izsfjr gksdj lrrk:<+ dsunzh; dkaxzsl ikvhz ds ncko esa fuokzpu vk;ksx }kjk fn;k x;ka ftl laca/k esa mdr lekpkj i= fnukad dks izdkf kr lekpkj i= dh izfr vusdtj ih& ;gfd] fxjh k kekz }kjk fnukad dks x`g ea=ky; Hkkjr ljdkj ls lwpuk ds vf/kdkj ds rgr tkudkjh ekaxh&,&ekuuh; lfpo x`g ea=ky; Hkkjr ljdkj] ubz fnyyh dks fy[ks x;s i= fo k;& bafm;u us kuy dkaxzsl ikvhz dks vkcafvr gkfk pquko fpug }kjk Hkkjrh; lafo/kku ds vuqpnsn 14 fof/k ds le{k lekurk,oa yksdrkaf=d izfø;k ds rgr gkfk fuokzpu izfr fujlr djus ckcr~] izkfkhz }kjk fnukad dks Hksts x;s i= dh izekf.kr izfrfyfia ch& izkfkhz }kjk Hksts xls i= fnukad esa lfpo x`g ea=ky; Hkkjr ljdkj] ubz fnyyh }kjk vkosnu ij dh xbz fohkkxh; dk;zokgh o Vhi lfgr nlrkostksa dh izekf.kr izfrfyfia lh& izkfkhz }kjk Hksts x;s i= fnukad esa dk;kzy; lfpo x`g ea=ky;] Hkkjr ljdkj] ubz fnyyh }kjk vkosnu ij dh xbz dk;zokgh dh izekf.kr izfrfyfia tks vusdtj ih& ;gfd] fxjh k kekz }kjk fnukad dks lfpo x`g ea=ky; Hkkjr ljdkj dks vkosnu fn;k x;k fd&^^hkkjr fuokzpu vk;ksx }kjk bafm;u us kuy dkaxzsl ikvhz dks rhu n kd iwoz vkcafvr gkfk pquko fpug }kjk vuqpnsn 14 fof/k ds le{k lekurk,oa yksdrkaf=d izfø;k ds rgr gkfk fujlr djus ckcr~a ;gfd] ernknk ds lkfk ernku dsunz esa nks gkfk ds iatk ysdj tkrk gs] tcfd 100 ehvj dh ifjf/k esa fuokzpu izrhd ys tkuk izfrcaf/kr gs] tks Hkkjrh; lafo/kku ds vuqpnsn 14 dk myya?ku djrk ernku dsunz ij yach ykbusa yxh jgrh gs ernku dsunz esa le; yxrk gs ijarq bafm;u us kuy dkaxzsl ikvhz ds ernkrk,oa ernku dsunz ij miflfkr ikvhz csbkyk tkrk gs }kjk gkfk ds iats fgykdj yksdrkaf=d izfø;k dks nwf kr dj ernkrk ds Lora= eksfyd vf/kdkjksa dk guu dj Hkkjrh; lafo/kku ds vuqpnsn 14 ds rgr fof/k ds le{k lekurk dk Hkh guu djrk tks vusdtj ih& ;gfd] fnukad dks Jherh euh kk kekz }kjk,d lwpuk i= eq[; fuokzpu vk;ksx] lfpo Hkkjr fuokzpu vk;ksx funsz kd fof/k Hkkjr fuokzpu vk;ksx] vk;qdr jkt; fuokzpu vk;ksx Hkksiky dks fn;k x;k ftlesa dgk x;k fd&^^ mdr lwpuk i= }kjk lwfpr fd;k tkrk gs fd lafo/kku ds vuqpnsn 14 fof/k ds le{k lekurk ds rgr bafm;u us kuy dkaxzsl ikvhz }kjk jk Vªh; /ot ds rhuksa jaxksa dk mi;ksx vius ikvhz /ot ds :i esa fd;s tkus,oa gkfk dk iatk pquko fpug ij vfr kh?kz jksd yxkbz tk;s vu;fkk eq> gkfk ds iats pquko fpug,oa jk Vªh; /ot ds jktusfrd nq:i;ksx ds fo:) laos/kkfud dk;zokgh djus gsrq foo k gksuk im+sxka tks vusdtj ih& ;gfd] fxjh k kekz }kjk fnukad ,oa dks lwpuk ds vf/kdkj ds rgr dk;kzy; dysdvj,oa ftyk fuokzpu vf/kdkjh Xokfy;j dks bl vk k; dk,d vkosnu fn;k fd& kgj Xokfy;j esa flfkr kkldh; in~ek fo ky; tks yksdlhkk] fo/kkulhkk,oa uxj fuxe fuokzpuksa esa ernku dsunz ds :i esa mi;ksx fd;k tkrk gs] mijksdr fo ky; ifjlj es ^^gkfkh** dh izkphu izfrek LFkkfir gs] ftls fuokzpu ds nksjku vkpkj pquko lafgrk ds ikyu esa dim+s ls <dk tkrk gs] mdr izfrek dks <dus laca/kh vkns k dh izekf.kr izfrfyfia kgj Xokfy;j esa flfkr kkldh; in~ek fo ky; ifjlj esa ^^gkfkh**dh izkphu izfrek LFkkfir gs] ftls fuokzpu ds nksjku vkpkj pquko lafgrk ds ikyu esa dim+s ls <dk tkrk gs] mdr izfrek dks <dus ij gksus okys yksdlhkk] fo/kkulhkk,oa uxj fuxe fuokzpuksa esa gksus okys [kpz esa laca/k esa foxr ikap o kksz dh fjiksvz dh izekf.kr izfrfyfia vkpkj pquko lafgrk ds ikyu esa ernku ifjlj in~ek fo ky; esa flfkr gkfkh dh izfrek fdrus o kksz ls <dh tk jgh gs] mijksdr <dus laca/kh vkns k dh izekf.kr izfrfyfi;k ftldk vkosnu vusdtj ih& ;gfd] ftyk fuokzpu vf/kdkjh Xokfy;j }kjk Hksts x;s lwpuk ds vf/kdkj ds rgr tckc fnukad esa fdlh Hkh izdkj dh dksbz Hkh tkudkjh in~ek fo ky; esa LFkkfir gkfkh dh ewfrz dks <dus ds laca/k esa ugha nh tcfd izkfkhz }kjk fnukad ,oa dks fn;s x;s vkosnuksa esa izkfkhz dks xqejkg djus dk iz;kl fd;k x;ka mijksdr i= MkW vkj- lh- fejk mi ftyk fuokzpu vf/kdkjh Xokfy;j i= fnukad vusdtj ih&301 94

95 293 ;gfd] fxjh k kekz }kjk fnukad ,oa dks lwpuk ds vf/kdkj ds rgr dk;kzy; dysdvj,oa ftyk fuokzpu vf/kdkjh Xokfy;j dks bl vk k; dk,d vkosnu fn;k fd& kgj Xokfy;j esa flfkr kkldh; in~ek fo ky; tks yksdlhkk] fo/kkulhkk,oa uxj fuxe fuokzpuksa esa ernku dsunz ds :i esa mi;ksx fd;k tkrk gs] mijksdr fo ky; ifjlj es ^^gkfkh** dh izkphu izfrek LFkkfir gs] ftls fuokzpu ds nksjku vkpkj pquko lafgrk ds ikyu esa dim+s ls <dk tkrk gs] mdr izfrek dks <dus laca/kh vkns k dh izekf.kr izfrfyfia kgj Xokfy;j esa flfkr kkldh; in~ek fo ky; ifjlj esa ^^gkfkh**dh izkphu izfrek LFkkfir gs] ftls fuokzpu ds nksjku vkpkj pquko lafgrk ds ikyu esa dim+s ls <dk tkrk gs] mdr izfrek dks <dus ij gksus okys yksdlhkk] fo/kkulhkk,oa uxj fuxe fuokzpuksa esa gksus okys [kpz esa laca/k esa foxr ikap o kksz dh fjiksvz dh izekf.kr izfrfyfia vkpkj pquko lafgrk ds ikyu esa ernku ifjlj in~ek fo ky; esa flfkr gkfkh dh izfrek fdrus o kksz ls <dh tk jgh gs] mijksdr <dus laca/kh vkns k dh izekf.kr izfrfyfi;k ftldk vkosnu gs] tks vusdtj ih& ;gfd] tutkx`fr dy;k.k lalfkk Xokfy;j }kjk fnukad dks vk;qdr Hkkjr fuokzpu vk;ksx] egkefge jk Vªifr] mijk Vªifr] iz/kkuea=h] yksdlhkk v/;{k] jk Vªh; v/;{k Hkkjrh; turk ikvhz] lfgr vu; lafo/kkfud inkf/kdkfj;ksa dks folr`r vkosnu lfgr nlrkost iznku fd;s x;s ftlesa o kz 1981 ls gkfk dk iatk pquko fpug mi;ksx fd;s tkus ls Hkkjrh; lafo/kku ds vuqpnsn 14 o vkpkj pquko lafgrk dk myya?ku djus ds dkj.k gkfk fuokzpu fpug rrdky izhkko ls fujlr djus gsrq iznku fd;s x;saa ftl ij dksbz Hkh dk;zokgh vkt fnukad rd Hkkjr fuokzpu vk;ksx }kjk ugha dh xbza 294 ;gfd] ftyk fuokzpu vf/kdkjh Xokfy;j }kjk Hksts x;s lwpuk ds vf/kdkj ds rgr tckc fnukad esa fdlh Hkh izdkj dh dksbz Hkh tkudkjh in~ek fo ky; esa LFkkfir gkfkh dh ewfrz dks <dus ds laca/k esa ugha nh tcfd izkfkhz }kjk fnukad ,oa dks fn;s x;s vkosnuksa esa izkfkhz dks xqejkg djus dk iz;kl fd;k x;ka mijksdr i= MkW vkj- lh- fejk mi ftyk fuokzpu vf/kdkjh Xokfy;j i= fnukad vr% ekuuh; ls fuosnu gs fd gkfk fuokzpu fpug dks xqtjkr lfgr ikap jkt;ksa esa gksus okys fo/kku lhkk fuokzpu dh vf/kwlpuk ds iwoz fujlr dj u;k fuokzpu fpug Hkkjrh; lafo/kku ds vuqpnsn 14,oa vkn kz fuokzpu lfgark ds rgr gkfk ds LFkku ij u;k fuokzpu fpug iznku djus dh dìk layxu & vusdtj 1 ls ysdj 302 rd layxu Jherh euh kk kekz lfpo tutkx`fr dy;k.k lalfkk Xokfy;j eks&

96 jft- ua- id- tu tkx`fr dy;k.k lalfkk Xokfy;j dk;kzy;&781] dsyk'k k fogkj dkwyksuh] flvh lsavj] Xokfy;j e-iz iz- &

97 jft- ua- id- tu tkx`fr dy;k.k lalfkk Xokfy;j dk;kzy;&781] dsyk'k k fogkj dkwyksuh] flvh lsavj] Xokfy;j e-iz iz- &

98 jft- ua- id- tu tkx`fr dy;k.k lalfkk Xokfy;j dk;kzy;&781] dsyk'k k fogkj dkwyksuh] flvh lsavj] Xokfy;j e-iz iz- &

99 jft- ua- id- tu tkx`fr dy;k.k lalfkk Xokfy;j dk;kzy;&781] dsyk'k k fogkj dkwyksuh] flvh lsavj] Xokfy;j e-iz iz- &

100 jft- ua- id- tu tkx`fr dy;k.k lalfkk Xokfy;j dk;kzy;&781] dsyk'k k fogkj dkwyksuh] flvh lsavj] Xokfy;j e-iz iz- &

101 jft- ua- id- tu tkx`fr dy;k.k lalfkk Xokfy;j dk;kzy;&781] dsyk'k k fogkj dkwyksuh] flvh lsavj] Xokfy;j e-iz iz- &