Dismissed

Mehmood Pracha v. Election Commission of India

Delhi HC8 Apr 2024W.P.(C)/5037/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A writ petitionbyMehmood Pracha against the Election Commission of India, seeking a direction to decide representations on whether elections be held via ballot papers or EVMs and to grant a hearing. The petitioner withdrew the petition after the ECI responded, reserving liberty to pursue other remedies. The court dismissed the petition.

What did the court decide?

The present petition was dismissed as withdrawn.

Mehmood Pracha Vs Election Commission of India — Election Law | Delhi HC (2024)

¶1

$~73

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

- W.P.(C) 5037/2024

¶4

MEHMOOD PRACHA ..... Petitioner Through: Ms. Jasneem Ahmadi, Ms. Mahima Rathi, Mr. Jatin Bhat and Mr. Shamim Choudhury, Advs.

¶5

versus

¶6

ELECTION COMMISSION OF INDIA ..... Respondent Through: Mr. Sidhant Kumar, Mr. Om Batra and Mr. Sarthak Sareen, Advs. for R- 1/ECI.

¶7

CORAM:

¶8

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SACHIN DATTA O R D E R % 08.04.2024

¶9

The present petition has been filed by the petitioner seeking inter - alia the following prayer:

¶10

“ a) Issue a writ in the nature of a writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ order or direction, directing the Respondent No.1 Election Commission of India to decide the representations dated 28th of March, 2024, and 2nd of April, 2024, made by the Petitioner .”

¶11

The representation dated 28.03.2024, addressed by the petitioner to Election Commission seeks that the elections to the 7-Rampur Lok Sabha Constituency, Uttar Pradesh, in which the petitioner has filed his nomination as an independent candidate, be held through ballot papers, or in the alternative to give to the petitioner a hearing before decision is taken to conduct the elections through electronic voting machines.

¶12

A communication dated 02.04.2024 was also sent by the petitioner to

¶13

This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 10/04/2024 at 12:33:33

¶14

the respondent, pursuant to the aforesaid representation dated 28.03.2024. 4. Learned counsel for the respondent, who appears on advance notice submits that the representation of the petitioner is thoroughly misconceived; the request made therein is not only untenable, the same also stands foreclosed on account of several orders passed by the Supreme Court, including order dated 30.09.2022 passed in SLP No.16870/2022 in Madhya Pradesh Jan Vikash Party vs. Election Commission of India which reads as under:

¶15

“ The election process under the representation of the People Act, 1951 is monitored by a Constitutional Authority like Election Commission. Electronic Voting Machines (EVM) process has been utilized in our Country for decades now but periodically issues are sought to be raised. This is one such endeavour in the abstract. It appears that party may not have got much recognition from the electorate now seeks recognition by filing petitions.

¶16

We are of the view that such petitions must be deterred and thus dismiss this petition with costs of Rs.50,000/- to be deposited with Supreme Court Group-C (Non-Clerical) Employees Welfare Association within a period of four weeks from today. Pending applications stand disposed of .”

¶17

He further submits that the petitioner has also filed an Application in W.P.(C) 184/2024 pending before the Supreme Court, raising identical averments which are made in the present petition and in the aforesaid representation. He submits that the present petition ought to be dismissed on this ground itself.

¶18

After some hearing, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that since the respondent/Election Commission of India has responded to the representation of the petitioner dated 28.03.2024 vide communication dated 06.04.2024, the petitioner does not wish to press the present petition. The petitioner seeks to reserve liberty to take recourse to appropriate legal

¶19

¶20

remedies, if available to him under law.

¶21

The present petition is accordingly dismissed as withdrawn. If the petitioner seeks to pursue other legal remedies, the same must be in conformance with, and to the extent permitted under law.

¶22

SACHIN DATTA, J

¶23

APRIL 8, 2024/ cl

¶24

This is a digitally signed order.

¶25

The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 10/04/2024 at 12:33:34

Mehmood Pracha v. Election Commission of India

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mehmood Pracha v. Election Commission of India

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

M/S Pravartee Sales Private Limited Vs Station Adjudant & Ors.

Govt of NCT of Delhi and Anr. Vs Bhupender Mathur and Anr.

Shubham Aggarwal Vs Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle 27 & Ors.

Alok Agarwal and Sons -Huf Vs Income Tax Officer Ward 34-1 & Anr.

Sandeep Govindan Vs Board of Discipline & Ors.

Susheel Jain Vs Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle 27, Delhi & Anr.

Susheel Jain Vs Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle 27, Delhi & Anr.

Mamta Agarwal Vs Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax (Central Circle) 28 Delhi & Anr.

Munesh Kumar Jain Vs Municipal Corporation of Delhi through Its Commissioner & Ors.

Niranjan Yadav Vs the State (Gnctd) and Ors.

Raghunath Builders Pvt. Ltd. Vs Municipal Corporation of Delhi through Commissioner & Anr.

Rinku Vs State ( Govt. of NCT of Delhi and Anr.

Sanjeev Kataria Vs Municipal Corporation of Delhi and Ors.

Mahender Kumar and Others Vs Municipal Corporation of Delhi