5/16/2014 Perils of non-disclosure - The Hindu

http://www.thehindu.com/opinion/editorial/perils-of-nondisclosure/article6013139.ece?css=print 1/1
Opinion Editorial
Published: May 16, 2014 02:26 IST | Updated: May 16, 2014 02:26 IST
Perils of non-disclosure
The recent judgment in the case of Kisan Shankar Kathore, who won an Assembly election in Maharashtra in 2004, constitutes a
significant decision.
It cannot be a happy experience for a lawmaker when a hard-fought election victory is nullified on a mere technicality.
Yet, legislators should now be wary of hiding, or not disclosing, the required information when they contest elections.
This is the key takeaway from the latest Supreme Court verdict on a candidates failure to disclose all the relevant
details in the prescribed form in the nomination papers. The act of voting is a form of free expression, and this right
requires that voters are aware of all relevant particulars of a contestant. This is why the current election law casts an
obligation on candidates to furnish information relating to their criminal antecedents, educational qualifications and
assets held by them, their spouses and dependant children. The landmark Supreme Court verdict in Association for
Democratic Reforms (2002) established that the Indian voter has a right to have all such information. Viewed in this
light, the recent judgment in the case of Kisan Shankar Kathore, who won an Assembly election in Maharashtra in
2004, constitutes a significant decision. The Court upheld a Bombay High Court judgment setting aside Mr.
Kathores election on the ground that he had failed to disclose his wifes ownership of a bungalow, the municipal dues
on it, and assets of a partnership firm, and dues that he personally owed to the Maharashtra State Electricity Board.
While confirming this judgment, the apex court has laid down two key points: non-disclosure of the spouses assets, in
this case, or, as a general rule, suppressing essential information or furnishing false or incomplete information will be
a ground for setting aside an election. Secondly, the fact that suppression of relevant information is an independent
offence in electoral law cannot be a reason for leaving the validity of the candidates election unquestioned. The
question did arise whether the Returning Officers acceptance of the nomination papers at the filing stage would not
go in favour of the winning candidate. The Court has made it clear that the Returning Officer cannot be expected to
hold a summary inquiry into some disputed facts and reject the nomination on the spot. Rather, it is a question that
ought to be decided in an election petition. Whether the non-disclosure amounts to a material lapse or not would
depend on the facts and circumstances of each case. The verdict places an additional burden on candidates to be
diligent and conscientious in complying with norms of disclosure. At the same time, it is an uncomfortable truth that
many years elapse before election petitions are decided, sometimes leaving invalid results survive the entire tenure of
a legislature. It is incumbent on the courts to deliver speedier decisions on election petitions.
Keywords: Representation of the People Act, Supreme Court verdict, Kisan Shankar Kathore, nomination papers, non-
disclosure of spouse assets, Election Commission, Returning Officer, Association for Democratic Reforms
Printable version | May 16, 2014 11:08:10 PM | http://www.thehindu.com/opinion/editorial/perils-of-
nondisclosure/article6013139.ece
The Hindu