SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2016 Supreme(All) 3138

ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
Amreshwar Pratap Sahi, Vijay Laxmi, JJ.
Azad Vikram Singh - Appellant
Versus
State of Uttar Pradesh Thru. Prin. Secy., Panchayati Raj and others - Respondent
Misc. Bench No. 15277 of 2016
Decided On : 05-07-2016

Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioner:- Rajendra Prasad Mishra, Advocate.
For the Respondent:- C.S.C.

Headnote:

Participation - Undertrial Prisoner's Right to Participate in Local Body Meetings - U.P. Kshettra Panchayat and Zila Panchayat Adhiniyam, 1961 - Section 9, 13, 81, 84, 9A, 62(5) - The court discussed the constitutional and statutory provisions related to the petitioner's right to participate in the meetings of the Kshettra Panchayat as an undertrial prisoner facing charges under Section 147, 148, 149, 302 read with Section 34 IPC. The court highlighted the duties of the Block Pramukh, disqualifications for membership of Kshettra Panchayat, and the right to vote and stand as a candidate for election. The court also considered the impact of the Representation of the People (Amendment and Validation) Act, 2013, and previous judgments on similar issues. The court concluded that no mandamus could be granted to the petitioner to perform his duties as Block Pramukh while detained in prison, and suggested seeking a fast track trial instead.

Fact of the Case:

The petitioner, an undertrial prisoner facing charges under Section 147, 148, 149, 302 read with Section 34 IPC, sought a mandamus to participate in the meetings of the Kshettra Panchayat and perform his duties as Block Pramukh. The petitioner had been elected as a member of the Kshettra Panchayat while in custody and was seeking permission to cast his vote and contest the election of Block Pramukh.

Finding of the Court:

The court found that the petitioner, being an undertrial prisoner, was not entitled to enforce his right to participate in the meetings of the Kshettra Panchayat through the discretionary jurisdiction of the court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. The court concluded that no mandamus could be granted to the petitioner to perform his duties as Block Pramukh while detained in prison, and suggested seeking a fast track trial instead.

Issues: The main issue was whether the petitioner, as an undertrial prisoner facing charges under Section 147, 148, 149, 302 read with Section 34 IPC, should be allowed to participate in the meetings of the Kshettra Panchayat and perform his duties as Block Pramukh.

Ratio Decidendi: The court's decision was based on the interpretation of constitutional and statutory provisions related to the petitioner's right to participate in the meetings of the Kshettra Panchayat as an undertrial prisoner. The court also considered the impact of the Representation of the People (Amendment and Validation) Act, 2013, and previous judgments on similar issues.

Final Decision: The writ petition was dismissed, and no mandamus was granted to the petitioner to perform his duties as Block Pramukh while detained in prison. The court suggested seeking a fast track trial instead.

JUDGMENT

Dr. Vijay Laxmi, J. –

Heard Shri R.P. Mishra, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel for the State.

2. A perennial question of intriguing constitutional importance that touches upon the ongoing debate of morality and law in this writ petition, namely, whether the petitioner, a Block Pramukh of Kshettra Panchayat, who is an undertrial prisoner for the commission of offences under Section 147, 148, 149, 302 read with Section 34 IPC, shall be allowed to participate in the meetings of the Kshettra Panchayat and to perform his duties as Block Pramukh (Chairperson) under the various provisions of the U.P. Kshettra Panchayat and Zila Panchayat Adhiniyam, 1961, (hereinafter referred to the 1961 Act).

3. The petitioner prays for a mandamus commanding the respondents to allow the petitioner to participate in the meetings of the Kshettra Panchayat, Block Mankapur, Tehsil Mankapur, District Gonda and perform his duties as Block Pramukh (Chairperson) under the provisions of the Act, 1961 in police custody as and when required.

4. The petitioner has filed his nomination papers as a candidate for being elected as a Member of the Kshettra Panchayat while he was in jail. He was elected as a Member of the Kshettra Panchayat from Gram Panchayat Madhai Pur, Ward No.23, Block Mankapur, Tehsil Mankapur, District Gonda. The election of Block Pramukh took place on 07.02.2016 in which the petitioner having obtained 53 votes as against his rival Sandhya Singh who has obtained 37 votes, came to be elected by a margin of 16 votes.

5. The petitioner is facing trial and is still under valid judicial custody in Sessions Trial No.84 of 2015 (State v. Rajesh Vikram Singh & others) arising out of Case Crime No.254 of 2014 under Sections 147, 148, 149, 302/34 IPC relating to Police Station Wazirganj, District Gonda. The case is pending in the Court of Additional Sessions Judge/FTC-I, Gonda. On administrative grounds, the petitioner was transferred from District Jail, Gonda to District Jail, Orai.

6. The petitioner filed Writ Petition No.1544 (M/B) of 2016 (Azad Vikram Singh v. State of U.P. & ors.) for directing the authorities to allow the petitioner to cast his vote and to contest the election of the Block Pramukh, Block Mankapur, District Gonda. The High Court permitted the petitioner to contest the election and cast his vote vide order dated 02.02.2016 extracted hereunder: -

"Heard Sri R.P. Misra, learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Addl. Chief Standing Counsel for the respondents no. 1, 2, 4 and 5 and Ms. Aprajita Bansal for the respondent no. 3 for the State Election Commission.

The petitioner is an under-trial and is in custody and presently lodged in District Jail, Orai.

The petitioner has filed this writ petition for the exercise of his voting rights in the elections of the post of Block Pramukh of Block Mankapur, District Gonda as he is the elected member of the Kshettra Panchayat from Ward No. 23, Madhaipur, Block Mankapur, District Gonda.

The petitioner was elected as a member of the Kshettra Panchayat while remaining in custody and was in jail. He, therefore, contends that the right to cast his vote vests in him and he cannot be divested of the same as such he may be permitted to cast his vote while in custody. He also proposes to contest the election of Block Pramukh and, therefore, prays that he should be permitted to file the nomination paper as well.

Sri Misra has invited the attention of the Court to Rule 8 of U.P. Kshettra Panchayat (Election of Pramukh and Up-Pramukh and Settlement of Election disputed) Rules, 1994 to urge that the petitioner should be permitted file his nomination as there is no prohibition against an under -trial, moreso in the background of the petitioner himself who has been elected while in custody as a member of the Kshettra Panchayat. He, therefore, submits that he should be permitted to file his nomination papers and be also allowed to cast vote. The last date of filing of nominations i
































































































Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top