Election petition can be filed in Hindi: SC

By T. Padmanabha Rao

NEW DELHI, JAN. 8. A three-member Bench of the Supreme Court affirmed the decision of a single judge of the Madhya Pradesh High Court holding that an election petition filed by a respondent against an appellant in the `Hindi' language was not liable to be dismissed, though Rule 2(b) of the relevant High Court rules provided that every election petition should be drawn up in the `English' language.

This was because, the Bench said, `rules' framed by the State High Court in exercise of its powers under Article 225 of the Constitution (jurisdiction of existing High Courts) ``are only rules of procedure and do not constitute substantive law and that rules cannot effect the import of constitutional provisions under Article 348 (2) of the Constitution.''

According to Article 348 - which deals with language to be used in the Supreme Court, High Courts and for Acts, Bills - ``all proceedings in the Supreme Court and in every High Court shall be in the English language.''

Clause(2) of Article 348 provides as follows: ``Notwithstanding anything in sub-clause (a) of clause (1), the Governor of a State may, with the previous consent of the President, authorise the use of the Hindi language, or any other language used for any official purposes of the State, in proceedings in the High Court having its principal seat in that State provided that nothing in this clause shall apply to any judgment, decree or order passed or made by such High Court.''

A notification dated September 18, 1971, issued by the Governor of Madhya Pradesh under clause (2) of Article 348, with the previous consent of the President of India, authorised the use of Hindi in all proceedings of the High Court other than for drawing up decrees, orders and judgments of the High Court, subject to certain conditions, the Bench said and pointed out that under the said notification, appeals, petitions etc, could thus, be presented in the High Court of Madhya Pradesh drawn-up in Hindi, notwithstanding the provisions of High Court Rules.

The Bench also held that Rule 2(b) of the High Court rules ``cannot be so construed as to render the constitutional provisions contained in Article 348(2) as meaningless'' and that Rule 2(b) of the High Court rules has to be read along with the notification issued by the Governor on September, 18, 1971, under Article 348(2) of the Constitution and when so construed, it follows that an election petition may be filed in Hindi language and it cannot be dismissed at the threshold under Section 86 of the Representation of People Act for alleged non-compliance with Rule 2(b) of the High Court Rules.''

The Bench comprising the Chief Justice, Dr. A.S. Anand, Mr. Justice R.C. Lahoti, and Mr. Justice Shivraj V. Patel, dismissed an appeal from an appellant (a returned candidate) seeking rejection of an election petition filed by the respondent challenging the appellant's election to the Madhya Pradesh State Legislative Assembly from Maheswar Constituency in 1998 on the ground that the election petition was drawn up in Hindi.

The appeal was filed by the appellant against the High Court ruling which dismissed the appellant's plea in this regard.

The Bench, in dismissing the appeal requested the High Court to expeditiously dispose of the election petition challenging the election of the appellant on grounds of certain alleged ``corrupt practices'' in connection with the election.

Send this article to Friends by E-Mail

Section  : National
Previous : Centre issues guidelines on 'Antyodaya'
Next     : Bring more material, court tells A.P. Cong. leader