Read Time: 03 minutes

Synopsis

The Delhi High Court, on Monday, rejected a plea seeking to impose a six-year ban on Prime Minister Narendra Modi for allegedly stoking hostility through his nationwide speeches. The court emphasized that the petition was based on a fundamental misunderstanding, as it was beyond the bench's authority to instruct the Election Commission to adopt a specific stance.

The bench of Justice Sachin Dutta noted 'The petitioner presupposes that there was a violation. However, the court cannot direct ECI to take a particular view'. Justice Dutta further acknowledged the Election Commission's stance that the plea will be examined per the representation made by Advocate Jondhale.  

During the recent court proceedings, Advocate Jondhale presented transcripts of PM Modi's speeches on April 20 and 21, characterizing them as ‘explosive speech that can divide the country’. 

However, the Election Commission of India (ECI) informed the court that it had already issued a notice to his party i.e. BJP regarding a speech delivered by him in Rajasthan. The ECI asserted its status as a constitutional body, stating that any inquiry would adhere to established procedures.

Advocate Jondhale argued that PM Modi's statements violated election conduct regulations, which prohibit actions that exacerbate existing divisions or provoke tensions between religious or linguistic communities. Additionally, he argued the use of religious sites for political purposes was prohibited. Jondhale contended that PM Modi's behavior constituted an offense under Section 153A of the Indian Penal Code and warranted disqualification under the Representation of the People Act, 1951.

However, the court noted that the petition was without any merit and therefore liable to be dismissed. 

Case Title: Anand S Jondhale v Shri Rajiv Kumar Chief Election Commissioner Of India & Anr