If religion, in any form, is allowed, the purpose of the electoral law gets defeated, the Bench said. The court, however, made it clear that the definition of religion is not an issue before it for consideration.
The Supreme Court on Thursday observed that religion should not be used to invoke votes. Chief Justice TS Thakur made it clear: "Religion, in any form, should not be brought into any election. It should not be the basis for seeking votes."
Thakur was heading a seven-judge Constitution Bench that was revisiting a 1995 judgment stating that 'Hindutva' was a way of life.
"If religion, in any form, is allowed, the purpose of the electoral law gets defeated," the Bench said. The court, however, made it clear that the definition of religion is not an issue before it for consideration.
There are two election petitions pending before the court for review. One of the petitions was filed by Narayan Singh against the 1993 election of former Chief Minister and Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) leader Sunder Lal Patwa from Madhya Pradesh. Singh alleged that Patwa had made reference to the Babri Masjid demolition in Ayodhya during the election. The MP High Court had dismissed his plea and upheld his election.
The second petition was filed by Maharashtra BJP leader Abhiram Singh, whose election was set aside by the Bombay High Court on the grounds that some BJP and Shiv Sena leaders invoked religion to garner votes during their speeches.
On Thursday, Patwa's Counsel, Senior Advocate Shyam Divan, submitted that Sub-Section (3) of Section 123 of the Representation of People Act (RPA) can be applicable if the candidate seeks votes in the name of his own religion or in he religion of his opponent. Divan argued that this will amount to corrupt practice and can be a ground for the disqualification of an elected representative.
Section 123 of the RPA states that "the appeal 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 any person on the ground of his religion, race, caste, community or language..."
The Bench then asked if the agent of a candidate also appeals for vote in the name of religion, does it attract charges of corruption under the Section? Divan said that the provision of RPA will not be applicable on the agent but other laws may be applicable.
While referring to Section 123 (3) and its wordings, the Bench said that the expression can be interpreted as the religion of voters. It asked Divan whether this will amount to corrupt practice. Divan submitted that the charge will be applicable only to the religion of a candidate or his opponent and not to the religion of the voters.
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
 "supreme-court")
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
)
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
)
)
)
)
)
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}