Table of Contents

Salient Features of the Representation of People’s Act

1 . Qualification Matters

Only elector can be representative. If not qualified to vote , then cant represent too.
If seat is reserved for SC or ST, then only SC or ST can be elected. However, he may be registered voter from other constituency
But in case of autonomous district of Assam, Sikkim, ST seat for Lakshadweep, elector should be enrolled in same constituency

Rajya Sabha	Should have his name in electoral roll of Parliamentary Constituency at time of election (not necessarily from that state)
Legislative Council	Should be ordinarily resident of state
Lok Sabha	Should be listed in electoral roll of any Parliamentary Constituency in India
MLA	Should be listed in electoral roll of any Assembly Constituency in state

2. Disqualification Matters

2.1 Disqualification on conviction for certain offences under Section 8

Under Section 8(1), 8(2) & 8(3) , Member will be Disqualified if convicted for these listed offences (even if punishment is just fine)

Spreading communal hatred or promoting enmity between groups
Offences related to rape
Cruelty toward woman by husband & dowry
Offence under Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985
Importing or exporting prohibited goods
Being a member or helping financially unlawful organisation
if sent to jail for atleast 2 years for any other crime.

Disqualification in all above cases will be from date of conviction and if there is imprisonment then till 6 years from date of his release.

But Section 8(4) provide a caveat – ie If MP/ MLA/MLC appeal within 3 months of his conviction date for revision of such conviction then he would not be disqualified

2.2 Disqualification under Corrupt Practices

Under Section 123 , MLA or MP can be disqualified under Corrupt Practices which include

Bribery – both giving & receiving monetary & non monetary benefits
Undue influences like threats, divine grace etc
Making race, religion, caste, sex, language etc as basis to get votes
Promoting hatred among Indians
Making statements on character or motives of other candidates which are false
Hiring of vehicle for conveyance of electors
Flouting expenditure norms
Taking help of government servants – gazetted officers , member of armed forced etc
Booth capturing – punishable with imprisonment not less than 1 year to 3 years

Case of person found guilty is referred to President for determination of question whether such person shall be disqualified or not & if yes then for what period (cannot exceed 6 years) . President decides in consultation with Election Commission & advice is conclusive

3. Political Parties

Any association which calls itself a political party shall have to apply to Election Commission of India for registration
Association’s memorandum shall contain specific provision that they bear allegiance to constitution of India
Political party has to prepare report relating to contribution more than ₹20,000 in a year & submit it to Election Commission of India

4. Right to Vote

All persons who are enrolled on electoral roll has right to vote
If person votes at more than one constituencies all his votes would be deem to be void .
Person in jail & lawful detention cant vote but in preventive detention can vote

Prelims Questions : Right to Vote is Constitutional Right while Right to Contest is Legal Right.

5. Disputes regarding Elections

Election disputes are to be tried by respective High Courts .
Election petition is the only way to challenge election.

Important cases regarding RPA : Lily Thomas vs Union of India 2000

Cause of case, following provisions of RPA,1951

Sec 8(1) & (2)	Those convicted for crimes listed under Section 8 (1), (2) of the Act will be disqualified for a minimum period of six years, even if the punishment is just a fine. (As mentioned above)
Sec 8(3)	If person is convicted under a punishable offence and jailed for 2 years , then he will be disqualified for 6 years
Sec8(4)	But if MP/ MLA appeal within 3 months of his conviction date for revision of such conviction then he would not be disqualified Due to this provision, MLA & MPs who have been convicted for murder of even Cabinet members were not disqualified.

Supreme Court gave verdict in favour of Lily Thomas and declared Section 8(4) as unconstitutional .

Importance of Judgement

It is small step in cleaning Indian politics and stop ‘CRIMINALISATION OF POLITICS’
Will play role in reducing muscle power
Leaders like Lalu Prasad have been disqualified and is showing desired affect
Parties are now cautious to give tickets to tainted leaders whose cases are running in the court and chances of being decided during the life of house.

Way forward

Bar candidates against whom charges have been framed by the court in heinous crimes from contesting elections
Lifetime ban on convicted politicians from contesting elections (as suggested by Election Commission of India in Nov 2018)
Set up fast track courts to exclusively prosecute and dispose criminal cases pending against MPs & MLAs within a year.
Bar convicted politicians from becoming office bearer of a party.

Is seeking votes on name of Religion come under corrupt practice?

Judgement ( Abhiram Singh v/s C.D. Comachen (dead)) 2017

4-3 Ruling
- “religion, race, caste or language would not be allowed to play any role in the electoral process”
- election of a candidate would be declared null and void if an appeal is made to seek votes on these considerations.
- Word HIS include both candidate and elector (ie broader definition)
Dissenting Judgement :
- RPA does not require such a broad interpretation and the word “his” does not include the elector/voter.
- Markers such as religion are deeply rooted in the structure of the Indian society.
The bench abstained from commenting on the “Hindutva” case.

Criticism of the judgement

Doesn’t take into account the social realities: Election and consolidation of Dalits in elections has played important role in the emancipation of Dalits
Historical Reason : People have faced discriminations and deprivations on the ground of religion, caste and language. Hence they can’t be stopped from mobilising on these basis.
Indian version of secularism is different from Western Concept & doesn’t make wall between Religion and State .
violates the right to freedom of speech under Article 19.
It “outlaws” parties like Akali Dal & Muslim League whose name violates this interpretation.
Practical Reason : On-ground and door-to-door campaigning can’t be monitored. Hence, difficult to implement

Favour of the judgement

Legislative history behind Section 123 of RoPA was to “curb communal, fissiparous and separatist tendencies. ” Present interpretation of Supreme Court is in line with this.
Religion can have no place in secular activities like elections
(Psychological Reason) Elections should be fought and votes should be casted on rational reasons .
Will help in promoting fraternity and integrity of nation
Inline with principles of secularism which is a basic feature of the Constitution

Earlier Judgement – Hindutva Judgement, 1995

Supreme Court had held that since “Hinduism” and “Hindutva” amounted to a “way of life”, not every election speech that invoked these words amounted to a corrupt electoral practice.