Delhi High Court
Akhil Bhartiya Azad Hind Party vs Election Commission Of India on 4 November, 2003
Author: B D Ahmed
Bench: B D Ahmed
JUDGMENT
Badar Durrez Ahmed, J.
1. The petitioner which initially was an association of persons constituted itself into a trust in 1999. It now seeks to be registered as a political party under the name of "Akhil Bhartiya Azad Hind Party".
2. Initially in 1998, the petitioner filed an application under Section 29-A of the Representation of People Act, 1951 (hereinafter referred to as the said Act) for registration as a political party under the name of "Azad Hind Party". That application was considered by the Election Commission and a reply was given to the petitioner on 28.09.1998. By the said reply, the Election Commission, in particular, indicated to the petitioner as under:
" The Commission has decided not to register any political party with "Azad Hind" as part of the name. Therefore, you may suitably change the name of your association.
Your application for registration will be further considered only on receipt of the above mentioned particulars/documents.
It is clear that the petitioner was required to suggest or give the name of the party which did not include the words "Azad Hind". However, the petitioner, without complying with the directions of the Election Commission, suggested another name for itself, namely, "Akhil Bhartiya Azad Hind Party". In response to the petitioner's request for registering it as a political party under the said name i.e. "Akihil Bhartiya Azad Hind Party", the Election Commission by a letter dated 23.11.1998 informed the petitioner that its application for registration would not be considered until the name of the party was changed as required in the Commission's letter dated 28.9.1998. This reply was given in the context of the explicit direction of the Commission that the words"Azad Hind" should not form any part of the name of the political party to be registered. Since the petitioner did not comply with this direction, the Election Commissioner refused to process the application any further.
3. Thereafter, the petitioner made repeated representations and requesting the Election Commission insisting on registering it as a political party under the name of "Akhil Bhartiya Azad Hind Party". Ultimately, by a letter dated 19.2.2003, the Election Commission refused to register the petitioner as a political party as long as it contained the word "Azad Hind" as part of its name. The rejection was in the following terms:
"As already explained to you earlier, the Commission had received a number of applications for registration under Section 29A, of Associations having the term "Azad Hind" as part of their names. The reasons for which the Commission refused to allow these names to your association and to the other similarly placed applicants, have also been explained to you earlier.
It may also be noted that our of the political parties referred to in your letter, the parties at S. Nos. 1,3,5,6 and 7, are not in existence at present, their names having been removed from the rolls of political parties by the Commission."
From the aforesaid, two things are clear. One, that the Election Commission has insisted that the petitioner should drop the words "Azad Hind" from the name of the political party that it seeks to register as. And, two, that other parties which had such names were also being removed from the rolls of political parties by the Commission.
4. Learned counsel for the respondent (Election Commission) has placed before me a decision dated 2.9.2003 of a Division Bench of the Allahabad High Court in the case of Azad Hind Party and Another v Union of India and Others (CW. Misc 207/1999). In that case, a similar situation arose and a political party sought to be registered under the name "Azad Hind Party". In the decision given by the Division Bench of the Allahabad High Court, it is clear that a counter affidavit had been filed by the Election Commission and it had been stated that several organisations had applied for registration as a political party by using the word "Azad Hind" in their names. It also becomes clear that their already exists a political party by the name of "Azad Hind Fauj" and accordingly any other political party using the words "Azad Hind" would be similar with the already registered party. Therefore, the Election Commission took the stand that all applicants which had incorporated "Azad Hind" in their names should apply with different names after dropping the words "Azad Hind" so that there would be no confusion amongst voters. While dealing with this, the Division Bench observed as under:
" A perusal of Section 29-A(7) shows that the Election Commission is not bound to register an applicant as a political party and it is in its discretion to do so or not. Of course the Election Commission cannot act arbitrarily in this respect, but as long as it does not do so this court should not interfere with its decision."
5. I am in agreement with these observations of the Allahabad High Court. It cannot be said that the decision of the Election Commission not to register the petitioner under the name suggested by it and incorporating the words "Azad Hind" is arbitrary or unreasonable. In this view of the matter, no interference is called for with the decision of the Election Commission requiring the petitioner to drop the words "Azad Hind" from its name. Accordingly, this writ petition is dismissed. However, dismissal of this writ petition does not mean that the petitioner cannot approach the Election Commission for other names that it may suggest without incorporating the words "Azad Hind".
