The Supreme Court of India on Monday allowed the withdrawal of a petition seeking to prohibit political parties from using names and symbols with religious connotations.
A bench of Justice MR Shah and Justice Ahsanadduin Amanullah was hearing a writ petition filed by Syed Waseem Rizvi, the former chairman of Uttar Pradesh Shia Central Board of Waqfs.
It is worth mentioning that Rizvi has changed his name to Jitendra Narayan Singh Tyagi after recently abandoning Islam and converting to Hinduism.
The petition sought not only a ban on political parties using religious names and symbols, but also strict enforcement of certain provisions of the Representation of the People Act, 1951, which prohibits luring voters and promoting feelings of enmity or hatred between different classes of citizens on the basis of religion.
A top court bench issued a notice in this matter in September 2022, asking the Election Commission of India to file its response. In its counter-affidavit, the commission told the Supreme Court that there was no express statutory provision in the Representation of Peoples Act, 1951 that prohibited the registration of political parties with religious connotations.
During a previous hearing, Senior Advocate Gaurav Bhatia, representing the petitioner, stated that two recognised state parties have the word ‘Muslim’ in their names. He pointed out that some political parties’ official flags featured a crescent moon and stars. According to him, the petition named several other parties with religious names.The petitioner had sought the intervention of the Indian Union Muslim League (IUML) and the All India Majlis-E-Ittehadul Muslimeen (AIMIM).
However, senior advocate Dushyant Dave, representing the IUML, argued on another day that the petitioner was selectively impleading certain parties. “The petitioner is being selective here,” he told the bench. Why is the petitioner focusing solely on the IUML when the Supreme Court requested the names of the ‘parties’ he wanted to implead? What about the Shiv Sena and the Shiromani Akali Dal?”
The Indian Union Muslim League requested that the ruling Bharatiya Janata Party be added as a respondent in the case because its symbol, the lotus, was a “religious symbol.”
Venugopal, representing AIMIM, stated that a petition seeking the same reliefs is currently pending before the High Court. He also claimed that the petitioner was taking a ‘selective approach’.
During the January hearing, the Supreme Court asked the petitioner not to be “selective” and reminded him that he must be “fair to everyone” and “secular” and should not leave room for an allegation that only one community was targeted.
