The restriction on voting rights for persons in prison or police custody aims to prevent criminalization of politics and maintain probity in elections.

( 1 ). In this writ petition, in substance the challenge is to the validity of Ss. 5 of Section 62 of the Representation of the People Act, the effect whereof is that any person who is confined in prison while serving a sentence of imprisonment on his conviction for any offence or is otherwise in lawful confinement in prison or in police custody for any reason, is not entitled to cast his vote in an election. This restriction, however, dos not apply to a person who is in custody on account of any kind of preventive detention.

( 2 ). The issue raised in this petition is nolonger res-integra. In Anukal Chandra Pradhan Vs. union of India And Others 1997, a three Judge bench of this court speaking through Verma, CJI (as His Lordship then was) examined the ambit and scope of Section 62 (5 of the Representation of the People Act, 1950 and after observing that criminalisation of politics is the bane of society and negation of democracy, rejected the challenge to the validity of the said Section. It was opined that the object of Section 62 (5 is to prevent criminalisation of politics and maintain probity in elections and that any provision which furthers that aim and promotes the object has to be welcomed, as sub-serving a great constitutional purpose. We are in respectful agreement with the view expressed by the three Judge bench in Anukal Chandra Pradhans case (supra) and are not persuaded to take a different view. This writ petition, therefore, fails and is dismissed. No costs.

.