HC upholds MP's election

Chennai, Mar 28 (UNI) Madras High Court today upheld the election of K M Khader Mohideen of the Indian Union Muslim League, who contested on the DMK symbol, from Vellore in the May 2004 Lok Sabha poll.

Mr Justice M Chockalingam upheld his election while dismissing a petition filed by a voter of the constituency, G S Iqbal, seeking to declare the election of Mr Mohideen as void and invalid.

Mr Iqbal was general secretary of Dravida Muslim Munnetra Kazhagam, an unrecognised political party, which supported the AIADMK.

He contended that the projection of Mr Mohideen as a DMK party member had created confusion in voters' minds. It had affected the results of the election materially. Mr Mohideen filed the nomination with a false declaration on the political party to which he belonged.

His party, the IUML, was recognised in Kerala with the ladder symbol. His nomination ought to have been rejected as it violated Section 13 (c) of the Election Symbol (Reservation and Allotment) Order.

The judge said the averments were bald. Even as per Mr Iqbal's evidence, average polling in a Parliamentary constituency was 55 to 60 per cent. In that election, it was 61.19 per cent. When political parties faced the Lok Sabha election, they aligned themselves into two pre-poll formations - DPA and NDA.

The DPA was headed by the DMK and the NDA by the AIADMK.

Electioneering was done by the two formations. It could not be said it was not made known to the public, which alignment a political party and movement belonged to.

There was nothing to infer that there was any confusion in the minds of the electorate. In view of poll percentage of 61.19 per cent, which even the petitioner said was in excess of normal, the contention that a large number abstained from voting, and if they had voted, the defeated candidate had won, could not be accepted.

The margin between the winning candidate and defeated candidate was over 1.78 lakh. By no stretch of imagination could it be said the petitioner had shown sufficient proof that the result of the election had been materially affected by non-compliance of legal provisions. In such circumstances, Mr Iqbal could not seek a declaration that the election of Mr Mohideen was void.

UNI XR AA SC DB1852