The Supreme Court on Thursday declined to entertain a public interest writ petition for a direction to the Election Commission to withdraw the recognition given to political parties resorting to hate speech and to cancel the candidature of politicians found guilty before the declaration of election results.
Petitioner-advocate Jafar Imam Naqvi, citing recent utterances of certain candidates in Varanasi from where the BJP’s prime ministerial candidate contested, said such speeches had the potential to affect social harmony.
Writing the judgment, Justice Misra said, “The Election Commission might have taken note of it [hate speech] and initiated certain action. Handling hate speeches could be a matter of adjudication on an appropriate legal forum and may also have some impact in an election dispute raised under the Representation of the People Act, 1951. Therefore, to entertain a petition as public interest litigation and to give directions would be inappropriate.”
The Bench pointed out that a PIL petition was initially used by this court as a tool to take care of certain situations related to the poor and under-privileged who were not in a position to have access to the court. Thereafter, the concept of PIL expanded with time. “But a PIL [petition] pertaining to speeches delivered during election campaign cannot be put on the pedestal of a real PIL. There are laws to take care of it.”
