Disposed

Dr.Mohammed Sadique K.P. v. the Chief Election Commission of India

Kerala HC19 Mar 2019WP(C)/7421/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Kerala disposed of this writ petition directing the Chief Election Commission to consider the petitioner's representation regarding the misuse of his late father's name and reputation in election campaigns and ascertain their jurisdiction to entertain such complaints.

What did the court decide?

Directive to finalize the Ext.P4 application in accordance with law expeditiously and ascertain jurisdiction before consideration.

Dr.Mohammed Sadique K.P. Vs the Chief Election Commission of India — Election Law | Kerala HC (2019)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHAJI P.CHALY

¶4

TUESDAY, THE 19TH DAY OF MARCH 2019 / 28TH PHALGUNA, 1940

¶5

WP(C).No. 7421 of 2019

¶6

PETITIONER/S:

¶7

DR.MOHAMMED SADIQUE K.P., AGED 47 YEARS, S/O. K.K.MOHAMMED KOYA,DARUSSALAM, KAVARATTI,LAKSHADWEEP-682555.

¶8

BY ADVS. SRI.K.M.FIROZ SMT.M.SHAJNA SRI.AASHIQUE AKTHAR HAJJIGOTHI SRI.E.C.AHAMED FAZIL SRI.P.C.MUHAMMED NOUSHIQ

¶9

RESPONDENT/S:

¶10

1 THE CHIEF ELECTION COMMISSION OF INDIA, OFFICE OF THE ELECTION COMMISSION OF INDIA, NIRVACHAN SADAN,ASHOKA ROAD, NEW DELHI-110001.

¶11

2 THE ELECTION COMMISSION FOR UNION TERRITORIES, F BLOCK,1ST FLOOR,M.S APARTMENTS, K.G.MARG,NEW DELHI,110001.

¶12

3 THE CHIEF ELECTORAL OFFICER, KAVARATTI ISLAND,UNION TERRITORY OF LAKSHADWEEP682555.

¶13

4 UNION OF INDIA, MINISTRY OF LAW AND JUSTICE,LEGISLATIVE DEPARTMENT, NEW DELHI-110001.REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY.

¶14

5 NATIONALIST CONGRESS PARTY(NCP), OFFICE AT NATIONALIST CONGRESS PARTY(NCP)STATE COMMITTEE,KAVARATTI, LAKSHADWEEP, INDIA.REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY,PIN682555.

¶15

6 K.M.ABDUL MUTHALIF,

¶16

WP(C).No. 7421 of 2019 2

¶17

AGED 48 YEARS, S/O.MALIKAKKAL KUNHI(LATE), STATE PRESIDENT,NATIONALIST CONGRESS PARTY(NCP),NCP OFFICE,KAVARATTI, LAKSHADWEEP-682553,INDIA.

¶18

7 P.P.MOHAMMED FAIZAL, AGED 40 YEARS, S/O.K.K.POOKKOYA THANGAL,NEAR OFFICE OF THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, MEMBER,NATIONALIST CONGRESS PARTY(NCP),OFFICE OF NCP,KAVARATTI, LAKSHADWEEP-682553,INDIA.

¶19

BY ADVS. R1 BY SRI.MURALI PURUSHOTHAMAN, SC,K.S.E.COMM R3 BY SRI.MANU.S, CGC, ADMINISTRATION OF THE UNION TERRITORY OF LAKSHADWEEP R4 BY SRI.P.VIJAYAKUMAR, ASG

¶20

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 19.03.2019, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶21

WP(C).No. 7421 of 2019 3

¶22

JUDGMENT

¶23

This writ petition is filed by the

¶24

petitioner seeking the following reliefs:-

¶25

“I. to call for the records leading to Exhibits P1 to P4 and to direct the respondents 1 to 4 to take immediate and appropriate steps to prevent misuse of name, photographs, videos and fame of petitioner's father by respondents 5 to 7 and their workers and followers in posters, meetings, campaigns etc by issuing a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ direction or order.

¶26

II. To declare that the respondents 5 to 7 and their men have no right to misuse or publish name, photographs, videos and fame of petitioner's father in their posters, meetings, campaigns, etc.”

¶27

III. Alternatively to direct the respondents 1 to 3 to consider and pass immediate orders based on Exhibits P2 and P4 representations by issuing a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ direction or order.

¶28

IV. To grant such other reliefs in favour of the petitioner as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit to grant.”

¶29

WP(C).No. 7421 of 2019 4

¶30

Petitioner is a native of Lakshadweep islands. He is the son of late Dr.K.K.Mohammed Koya, who was the former president of Janata Dal(United), Lakshadweep unit.

¶31

According to the petitioner, respondents 5 to 7 are misusing the name, photographs, videos and fame of late Dr.K.K.Mohammed Koya, affecting the reputation and the legal rights of the deceased, which the deceased continue to have even after his death. It is also pointed out that, such misuse and publication amounts to defamation imputing ideologies which the deceased never followed or accepted, and would have harmed his reputation, if alive. The deceased would not have allowed such a wrong misuse presenting his name and fame, if he was alive. The publication and misuse is also intended to be hurtful to the feelings of the family members and other near relatives, including the wife of the deceased as well as the petitioner.

¶32

Therefore, the imputation by a political

¶33

party in which the deceased was never a member,

¶34

WP(C).No. 7421 of 2019 5

¶35

harms the reputation of the deceased in the estimation of others and lowers the moral and intellectual character of the deceased. Anyhow, seeking to ventilate the grievances, petitioner has submitted Ext.P4 before the 1^st respondent. The sole direction sought for is consideration of Ext.P4.

¶36

The 1^st respondent has filed a statement stating that, Ext.P4 representation is pending consideration before the commission and the same will be disposed of in accordance with law, expeditiously.

¶37

Learned counsel appearing for the Lakshadweep administration submitted that, a suit, O.S No.8/2018 is filed by the wife and daughter of late Dr.K.K.Mohammed Koya, seeking permanent prohibitory injunction against respondents 6 and 7 and their men from utilizing the name of Dr.K.K.Mohammed Koya in election campaigns in any manner, which is pending consideration before the Munsiff's Court, Androth.

¶38

Today, when the matter is taken up, learned counsel submitted that, the

¶39

WP(C).No. 7421 of 2019 6

¶40

interlocutory application submitted by the plaintiffs in the suit was dismissed.

¶41

I have heard respective counsel across the Bar and perused the pleadings and the documents on record.

¶42

The sole question to be considered is, whether petitioner is entitled to get Ext.P4 considered by the 1^st respondent. It is true, the 1^st respondent has stated that Ext.P4 is pending consideration and a decision will be taken in Ext.P4 at the earliest possible time. However, the question is, whether there is power vested with the 1^st respondent to consider any application like Ext.P4, since the subject issue raised by the petitioner is in respect of reputation and defamation, etc. etc. of late

¶43

Dr. K.K.Mohammed Koya. Anyhow, it is a matter to be decided by the 1^st respondent.

¶44

In that view of the matter, this writ petition is disposed of, directing the 1^st respondent to finalize Ext.P4 application in accordance with law as expeditiously as possible.

¶45

I also make it clear that, the 1^st

¶46

WP(C).No. 7421 of 2019 7

¶47

respondent shall first ascertain whether there is jurisdiction conferred on the said authority to entertain compliant of such a nature, and thereafter only, the other questions can be considered by the 1^st respondent.

¶48

The writ petition is disposed of accordingly.

Sd/-

SHAJI P.CHALY

JUDGE

uu 19.03.2019

WP(C).No. 7421 of 2019 8

¶54

APPENDIX

¶55

PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:

¶56

EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 7-11-2017 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE SECOND RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE CHIEF ELECTORAL OFFICER,LAKSHADWEEP DATED 16.2.2018. EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 25.4.2018 SEEKING LEGAL OPINION BY THE CHIEF ELECTORAL OFFICER. EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 9.7.2018 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE CHIEF ELECTION COMMISSIONER OF INDIA AS THE PRESIDENT OF JANATA DAL (UNITED),LAKSHADWEEP UNIT.

¶57

RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS:NIL

¶58

//TRUE COPY//

¶59

P.A. TO JUDGE

Dr.Mohammed Sadique K.P. v. the Chief Election Commission of India

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Dr.Mohammed Sadique K.P. v. the Chief 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

K R Girijhan Vs the Superintending Engineer

Anil Kumar Vs State of Kerala

Pts Hitech Projects India Private Limited Vs State of Kerala

Prince T.Antony Vs Greater Cochin Development Authority(Gcda)

M.U.Paul Vs the State Bank of India

Sultan Thomas Oommen Vs District Collector