SECTION 123(3) OF REPRESENATION OF PEOPLE ACT,1951

Section 123(3) of RPA Act, 1951 declares a corrupt practice if:

“The appeal by a candidate or his agent or by any other person with the consent of a candidate or his election agent to vote or refrain from voting for any person on the ground of his religion, race, caste, community or language…..”

The word “his” was included through an amendment in 1961.

A seven-judge Supreme Court bench ruled by a 4-3 majority that “religion, race, caste, community or language would not be allowed to play any role in the electoral process”

 It also said that election of a candidate would be declared null and void if an appeal is made to seek votes on these considerations.

The Judgement

 The judgment was handed out as an interpretation of Section 123(3) of the Representation of the People Act, 1951.

 Section 123(3) deals with abiding to “corrupt practices” for canvassing votes in an election.

 The bench had at hand the task of the interpreting the word “his” in section 123(3) in RPA.

The majority believed that “his” here refers to the any candidate or his agent or any other person making the appeal with the consent of the candidate or the elector. To justify this interpretation, the bench took cues from various amendments of RPA.

It also said that to maintain the “purity” of the electoral process; certain arguments must be taken off the table such as religion, caste and language.

The dissenting judges on other the hand believed that Section 123(3) of the RPA does not require such a broad interpretation and the word “his” does not include the elector/voter.

The dissenting judges remarked that markers such as religion are deeply rooted in the structure of the Indian society.

The bench abstained from commenting on the “Hindutva” case.

Criticism

 It is difficult to define what kind of an appeal is religious appeal.

 This interpretation violates the right to freedom of speech under Article 19.

 RPA already has provisions to curb hate speech or speech that spreads enmity.

 A broad interpretation “outlaws” parties like Akali Dal whose very name violates this interpretation.