“ECI Informs Delhi High Court It Cannot Control Political Alliances in PIL Over Opposition Parties’ Use of ‘INDIA’ Acronym”
Last Updated on October 31, 2023 by News Desk
Issue: The Delhi High Court is now considering the case “Girish Bharadwaj v. Union of India & Ors.” Girish Bharadwaj, a businessman, is suing a new coalition of 26 opposition political parties for using the term “INDIA” (Indian National Developmental Inclusive coalition). The central question is whether the Election Commission of India (ECI) has the ability to regulate political coalitions and whether adopting the abbreviation “INDIA” for their political alliance is permissible.
Facts of the Case: Girish Bharadwaj launched a public interest litigation (PIL) against the 26 political parties that make up the “INDIA” coalition, saying that they are abusing the acronym to obtain an unfair advantage in the approaching 2024 general elections. According to Bharadwaj, this method is deceptive and may encourage political animosity and violence. He further claims that utilizing the “INDIA” abbreviation for political reasons breaches the Emblems and Names (Prevention of Improper Use) Act of 1950.
Arguments Presented by Parties:
According to Bharadwaj, the political parties’ use of the “INDIA” moniker is intended to manipulate and garner the sympathies and votes of innocent folk. He claims that this approach might spark political violence and threaten the country’s law and order.
Political coalitions are not recognized as regulated bodies under the Act or the Constitution, according to the ECI. To back up its position, the ECI cites a Kerala High Court ruling.
Reasoning of the Judgment: According to the Delhi High Court, the ECI is not allowed to oversee political coalitions under current legislative frameworks. The court further stated that under Section 29A of the Representation of the People Act, 1951, the ECI’s mandate is confined to registering political party associations. As a result, the court was unable to rule on the validity of the 26 political parties’ use of the “INDIA” abbreviation under applicable statutes.
Judgement: Girish Bharadwaj’s PIL was rejected by the Delhi High Court. The court ruled that because the ECI cannot control political alliances, it cannot take action against political parties for adopting the “INDIA” abbreviation. The court emphasised that its ruling was restricted to the limits of the ECI’s jurisdiction and did not address the legality of the acronym’s use. As a consequence, the political parties’ use of the term “INDIA” for their partnership was not outlawed.
Case Title: Girish Bharadwaj v. Union of India & Ors.
Written by: Nikita Shankar @nikitaashankar
