Follow Us
Saurabh Malik
Tribune News Service
Chandigarh, September 26
More than two years after SAD-BJP candidate Narinder Kumar Sharma was elected as Member of Punjab Legislative Assembly from Dera Bassi constituency, the Punjab and Haryana High Court on Thursday dismissed a petition challenging his election.
The ruling came on Sharma’s application seeking dismissal of the election petition filed by rival candidate Deepinder Singh Dhillon on the ground that it was baseless. Justice Sudip Ahluwalia asserted the Court did not find tangible cause of action for petitioner Dhillon to challenge the respondent’s election in 2017 on the alleged ground of non-disclosure of his liabilities towards the government or public institution.
These were actually liabilities of company/companies he was associated with only in his capacity as director. He was not obligated to disclose it in accordance with specific format in force at the relevant time. “The election petition stands dismissed,” Justice Ahluwalia ruled.
Giving details, Justice Ahluwalia ruled the new requirement of declaring contracts with the government, public company or companies was introduced only after October 10, 2018. It was admittedly not in existence when respondent Sharma was elected in March, 2017. He could not, by any stretch of imagination, be penalised at this stage for not having disclosed particulars, which were never required of him in the specific format.
“Such an interpretation based on the principle of ‘morality’ so emphatically stressed on behalf of petitioner, in the opinion of the Court, is not called for, as the same would not only have the effect of violating the basic canons of jurisprudence that a person cannot be penalised retrospectively for not disclosure of any particulars, which were never required to be disclosed at the relevant time.
“Such a course would also have the effect of overreaching the competent authorities i.e. Election Commission, or the Central Government, who were otherwise authorised to incorporate or modify Form-26 with the evolution of time,” Justice Ahluwalia. Form-26-affidavit is to be submitted by candidates along with his nomination papers.
The High Court, during the course of arguments, had questioned how liabilities towards companies could be considered personal liabilities of a candidate? The query came during the hearing of Sharma’s application for dismissal of election petition. His counsel submitted Sharma, in his nomination papers, clearly gave all details of liabilities of his companies. He added that liabilities of companies could not be seen as personal liabilities of a candidate.
3
5
8