... AND THE TROPHY GOES TO HINDU RASHTRA!

The drums and bugles of political war between the aspirants of power have been sounding at the highest pitch since the official announcement of General Elections in the country!

The proverbial ' common man' has been flabbergasted by the show of money and muscle power by the contesting entities. Now, he is fully convinced that India that is Bharat is indeed, the world's fifth largest economy! The amount of money spent on account of propaganda by the candidates and their sponsoring alas is far beyond the official limit fixed by the Election Commission of India. Still, nobody complains or rushes to the court because all are equal in the bathroom.

The election manifesto which ideally should be a contract between a contesting entity and the voters, have reduced into a lollypop! The manifesto is released by the contestants as a routine electoral formality and the voters too, don't take it seriously.

That is why the oft used narratives such as elimination of poverty, removal of unemployment, upliftment of women, schedule castes, schedule tribes and other backward classes are rolled around.

As a topping, additional soaps such as monthly or yearly doles of certain amount to women; farmers or the unemployed or retired people are also offered with attractive garnish.

In a nutshell, the drama of democratic exercise is held at regular intervals. The players and the audience fully know the real nature of the drama. At the end, when results are announced, the winner will have a reason to capture the seat of political power with the seal of legality and the losers and voters will take solace in the fact they too, participated in the said drama.

In order to see real democracy flourish some basic features will have to set right. First, increasing the number of elected representatives from 543 to at least 5,000, consequently, the geographical area of a constituency will also decrease substantially as also the number of voters. Such a situation will encourage even a person with small earnings to stand for the election.

Second, the basic functions of august Houses are to get the pulse of the people's issues and frame, vary or delete the laws.

These are very crucial to ensure the Rule of Law in the country. Therefore, the eligibility criteria must ensure that the persons irrespective of their religion, caste or gender are worthy of the coveted seat in the legislature. Some minimum educational qualification and crime -free antecedents should be laid down for all the contesting candidates.

Last but not the least is making the election manifesto compulsory for all parties and independent candidates. Such manifesto should be granted the legal status in order to make it enforceable at law. Any serious breach of the promises made in the manifesto should result in the disqualification of the person even after getting elected and also attract a further ban at least for next ten years.

This is all the way more important because there is neither any provision for plebiscite or referendum nor for the recall of the elected representative in our Constitution.

Sadly, due to the ‘Secular’ nature of our Constitution, the mammoth Hindu majority which clearly craves for the Hindu Rashtra is sidetracked and brow - beaten. Ironically, the parties like Congress, AIMIM and Muslim League mince no words in supporting Islam openly while the BJP which claims to herald the age of Hindutva or its mentors such as the RSS, Vishwa Hindu Parishad, Bajrang Dal, Hindu Jana Jagruti Samithi etc; shy away from espousing the cause of Hindu Rashtra.

Further, the RSS even goes to the extent of declaring that India is already a Hindu Rashtra ! Surely, such hypocrisy will lead nowhere to the ruling BJP as the Hindu voters by and large have learnt to read between the lines. Needless to say that the Hindu vote will go to a party which clearly and unequivocally stands for declaring India, that is Bharat, the Hindu rashtra! Alas! such a party is yet to come in the political battlefield.

SC EXPANDS WRIT JURISDICTION IN CERTAIN CASES

A three-judge bench comprising Justice B R Gavai, Justice Rajesh Bindal and Justice Sandeep Mehta of the Supreme Court on April 10, outlined situations when a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution could be entertained inspite of the availability of an alternative remedy. Some of them are as follows:

‘i) Where the statutory authority has not acted in accordance with the provisions of the enactment in question;

ii) It has acted in defiance of the fundamental principles of judicial procedure;

iii) It has resorted to invoke the provisions which are repealed; and

iv) When an order has been passed in total violation of the principles of natural justice.’

These exceptions have been carved out in the case entitled PHR INVENT EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY v/s UCO BANK AND OTHERS.

ALLAHABAD HC ON SCOPE OF ARTICLE 226 OF CONSTITUTION

Justice J J Munir of the Allahabad High Court has recently held that unless allegations of violation of Article 14 or Article 16 are made, the matter cannot be adjudicated by the High Court under Writ jurisdiction. The court added that the contractual disputes if not per se arbitrary, must be referred under the Uttar Pradesh Industrial disputes Act, 1947. The matter involved was in the case titled Mahesh Kumar v/s State of UP and another.

KARNATAKA HC DECLINES PUNITIVE ACTION AGAINST DISABLED HUSBAND

In a case entitled Priyanka Singh v/s Pankaj Singh Sengar, Justice M Nagaprasanna of the Karnataka High Court refused to direct a husband with 75% disability to pay maintenance to his estranged wife. The court also set aside an order of the execution court directing an arrest warrant or levying fine against the defaulting husband.

The court added, ‘the husband walks with the help of crutches. Therefore, in the considered view of the court no direction can be issued to the husband to pay maintenance to the wife/respondent as he is no longer an able bodied man to search for employment and pay maintenance to maintain the wife and the child.’

OMNIBUS ALLEGATIONS OF CRUELTY U/S 498A IPC REQUIRE NO PROSECUTION

The Telangana High Court has recently held that omnibus allegations of Cruelty u/s 498A of IPC do not warrant prosecution. Relying on the Supreme Court’s judgment in KahkashanKausar @ Sonam v/s The State of Bihar, Justice E V Venugopal allowed two writ petitions filed by husband accordingly.