Read Time: 04 minutes
The plea highlighted that candidates contesting elections under AAP’s symbol should be obligated to disclose that the party members had been charge-sheeted by the Enforcement Directorate for allegedly utilizing illegal funds during the Goa Assembly elections.
The Delhi High Court, on Monday, dismissed a public interest litigation seeking the de-recognition of the Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) for allegedly failing to disclose the criminal antecedents of the party and its candidates during election nominations and affidavits.
The PIL sought directions against the Election Commission of India (ECI) to suspend, revoke, or cancel AAP's registration in light of the upcoming Delhi Assembly Elections 2025, as well as future Lok Sabha and other Assembly elections across India.
Ashwini Mudgal, the petitioner, argued that the party’s failure to disclose the criminal records of its candidates and its own alleged criminal history contravened the Supreme Court's directives, which required political parties and candidates to disclose criminal backgrounds during the nomination process.
Advocate Radhika Khushaldas, representing the petitioner, specifically highlighted AAP’s alleged involvement in the purported liquor scam, wherein the party was reportedly named as an accused. The plea claimed that AAP had failed to comply with the Supreme Court's mandatory disclosure requirements.
The bench of Chief Justice Devendra Kumar Upadhyay and Justice Tushar Rao Gedela observed that the Supreme Court had issued binding guidelines on the disclosure of criminal antecedents. The court further noted that no legal provision permitted the de-recognition of a political party solely on the grounds of failure to disclose such information.
Subsequently, the petitioner withdrew the PIL, with the liberty to approach the Supreme Court directly if they wished to pursue the matter further.
The petitioner contended that the ECI had taken no action against AAP, despite receiving a representation dated January 19, 2025. It was further alleged that the Commission had neither responded to the petitioner’s queries regarding inaction against AAP nor required the party to publicly declare on its official website that it was an accused in the alleged liquor scam and had been charge-sheeted by the ED.
Case Title: Ashwani Mudgal v Union Of India (W.P.(C)-991/2025)[Inputs: ANI]
Please Login or Register
