The paragraphs that stand recalled had found the BJP guilty of contempt, and imposed the fine on the party. In its order, the Court had stated,
“…we are of the view that the reason given by the party for failing to submit Form C-7 in respect of one of its candidates is not acceptable and that the party has not provided reasons for selection of its candidates which are in line with our directions. This being the case, the Respondent No. 7 (BJP) is in contempt of the Order dated 13.02.2020.”
At today’s hearing, Amicus Curiae KV Viswanathan argued that no case for review of the Court’s 2021 judgment was made out.
Justice Gavai then pointed out that contempt has to be deliberate and wilful, to which the Amicus responded that the same yardstick was applied and upheld for the other parties that were held guilty of contempt as well.
Justice Maheshwari then remarked,
“There are two aspects. One is that satisfactory reasons are not given as to why a candidate with criminal antecedents was preferred, we think that is subjective. Whether that is wilful? For C7 [form], one name was missing but this kind of error is not unknown to us…We are entering into an arena with subjective elements in a decision-making process.“
Justice Gavai weighed in, saying that it was for Parliament to take a call on whether it wants to debar candidates with criminal antecedents from contesting, and the top court could not restrict such candidates from being fielded at all.
“It is not about penalising [the political parties] but the stigma,” he added.
Source: Barandbench
