New Delhi: The Delhi High Court has upheld a single judge order dismissing a plea seeking to de-register Asaduddin Owaisi-led All India Majlis-e-Ittehadul Musalimeen (AIMIM) as a political party by the Election Commission of India (ECI).
A bench of former acting chief justice Vibhu Bakhru and Justice Tushar Rao Gedela, in a judgment passed on January 16, concured with the view of the single bench.
What did the division bench say?
“The single judge had accordingly held that ECI does not have the powers to deregister AIMIM on the grounds as set out by the appellant in the said petition. We concur with the said view. In view of the above, the appeal is unmerited,” the division bench held.
What did the petitioner submit?
The petitioner, Tirupati Narasimha Murari, contended that the constitution of AIMIM is intended to further the cause of only one religious community, which is Muslims, and thus it was against the principles of secularism, to which every political party must adhere under the scheme of the Constitution and the Representation of the People (RP)Act.
Murari, who was a member of the undivided Shiv Sena at the time of filing the petition and informed the High Court during the course of hearing that he is now a member of the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), assailed the orders of the ECI registering and recognising the AIMIM as a political party on the ground that it does not fulfil the conditions laid down in section 29A of the RP Act.
What did the single bench say?
A single bench of Justice Prateek Jalan, however, said in its order passed in November last year that the AIMIM fulfilled the requirement under section 29A of the Act.
“On the facts of the present case, this requirement has been fulfilled by AIMIM. The petitioner himself has annexed to the writ petition, a letter dated 09.08.1989, submitted by AIMIM in support of its application for registration, stating that its constitution had been amended in terms of section 29A(5) of the Act,” the single bench said.
The single bench further said that the submissions made by the petitioner tantamount to interference with the fundamental rights of the members of AIMIM to constitute themselves as a political party espousing their political beliefs and values and such a consequence cannot lightly be countenanced.
