Satish Kumar Aggarwal vs Union Of India And Ors.
- Court
- Delhi High Court
$~64
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
% Date of Decision: 20.05.2026
+ W.P.(C) 7019/2026
SATISH KUMAR AGGARWAL .....Petitioner
Through: Mr. Barun Kumar Sinha, Ms. Pratibha
Sinha, Mr. Sneh Vardhan and Mr.
Vaibhav Singh, Advocates.
versus
UNION OF INDIA AND ORS. .....Respondents
Through: Mr. Ankur Mittal, CGSC with Mr.
Aviraj Pandey, Ms. Sobhya Jain, Mr.
Hrithik Saxena and Ms. R. Jaiswal,
Advocates for R-1/UOI.
Mr. Sanjay Vashishtha, SC with Mr.
Siddhartha Goswami, Mr. Ashish
Shukla, Mr. Aditya Sachdeva and Mr.
Krish Bhatia, Advocates for R-2/ECI.
CORAM:
HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE TEJAS KARIA
DEVENDRA KUMAR UPADHYAYA, CJ( ORAL )
1. Heard Mr. Barun Kumar Sinha, learned Counsel representing the
Petitioner, Mr. Ankur Mittal, learned Counsel representing Respondent No.1
/ Union of India and Mr. Sanjay Vashishtha, learned Counsel representing
Respondent No. 2 / Election Commission of India.
2. Jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of
India, 1950 (“ Constitution ”) has been sought to be invoked ostensibly in
public interest by instituting the proceedings of this Petition under Article
226 of the Constitution with the following prayers:-
Signature Not Verified
Signed By:NEELAM
SHARMA
Signing Date:22.05.2026
10:48:38
W.P.(C) 7019/2026 Page 1 of 15
“(i) To issue a writ of mandamus commanding Respondent No. 2,
i.e. the Election Commission of India, to deregister Respondent No.
3 political party, i.e. the Aam Aadmi Party, for violation of Section
29A(5) of the Representation of the People Act, 1951;
(ii) To direct Respondent No. 2 to declare Respondent Nos. 4 to 6
disqualified from contesting elections to either the Parliament or the
Assembly;
(iii) To pass such other or further order as this Hon’ble Court may
deem fit and proper facts and circumstances of the case.”
3. A perusal of the prayer clause of the Writ Petition, thus, reveals that a
direction has been sought to be issued to Respondent No. 2 / Election
Commission of India (“ Election Commission ”) to deregister Respondent
No. 3, a political party for violation of the provisions contained in Section
29-A(5) of the Representation of the People Act, 1951 (“ R.P. Act ”).
4. The Petitioner has also sought a direction to be issued to Respondent
No. 2 / Election Commission to declare Respondent Nos. 4 to 6 as
disqualified from contesting elections either to the Parliament or to the State
Assembly. It has been submitted by the learned Counsel for the Petitioner in
support of the first prayer that in terms of the provisions contained in
Section 29-A of the R.P. Act, any application made by an association
seeking registration as a political party has to accompany a copy of the
memorandum or rules and regulations of the said association and such
memorandum or rules and regulations shall contain a specific provision that
the association or body shall bear true faith and allegiance to the
Constitution and to the principles of socialism, secularism and democracy
and would uphold the sovereignty, unity and integrity of India. The
submission is that in view of the judgment of this Court dated 20.04.2026 in
Signature Not Verified
Signed By:NEELAM
SHARMA
Signing Date:22.05.2026
10:48:38
W.P.(C) 7019/2026 Page 2 of 15
Crl.Rev.P. 134/2026, since there are certain observations made by the Court
in respect of the conduct of Respondent Nos. 4 to 6, who are the members of
the political party concerned, as such the political party has rendered itself
disqualified to continue to be registered for violation of the provisions
contained in Section 29-A(5) of the R.P. Act.
5. In respect of the other prayer, where a direction has been sought to be
issued to Respondent No. 2 / Election Commission, to declare Respondent
Nos. 4 to 6 as disqualified from contesting elections to either the Parliament
or the State Assembly, reliance has been placed by the learned Counsel for
the Petitioner on the provisions contained in Article 84(c) of the
Constitution, according to which a person shall not be qualified to be a
Member of Parliament unless he possesses such other qualification as may
be prescribed in that regard by or under any law made by the Parliament and
since as per the judgment of this Court referred to herein above, dated
20.04.2026, the Respondent Nos. 4 to 6 have incurred disqualification in
terms of Section 29-A(5) of the R.P. Act, a declaration needs to be made by
Respondent No. 2 / Election Commission of India that these private
Respondents are not qualified to contest the elections to Parliament or to the
State Assembly.
6. Having heard the learned Counsel for the Parties, we are of the
considered opinion that for the reasons which follow, the Writ Petition is
highly misconceived.
7. Registration of political parties and the matters connected thereto are
governed by Part IVA of the R.P. Act. Section 29-A of the R.P. Act
provides for registration of any association or body of individual citizens
Signature Not Verified
Signed By:NEELAM
SHARMA
Signing Date:22.05.2026
10:48:38
W.P.(C) 7019/2026 Page 3 of 15
with the Election Commission, according to which, any such association
calling itself a political party and intending to avail itself of the provisions of
Part IVA of the R.P. Act, will be required to make an application to the
Election Commission for its registration as a political party for the purposes
of the R.P. Act.
8. Sub-section 2 of Section 29-A of the R.P. Act requires that such an
application has to be made by an association or body of individual citizens,
which has been in existence at the commencement of the Representation of
People (Amendment) Act, 1988 within 60 days next following such
commencement and also by any other association or body of citizens, which
is formed after commencement of the said amending Act, within 30 days
next following the date of the formation of the association.
9. Sub-section 3 of Section 29-A of the R.P. Act requires certain
formalities to be completed by the association or body of citizens seeking its
registration with the Election Commission. It also sets out the particulars
and informations to be supplied by the association or body of citizens
seeking its registration.
10. Sub-section 5 of Section 29-A of the R.P. Act mandates that any
application made by an association or body of citizens seeking its
registration under sub-section 1 of Section 29-A of the R.P. Act shall
necessarily be accompanied by a copy of the memorandum or rules and
regulations of association and such memorandum or rules and regulations
shall contain a clear provision that the association shall bear true faith and
allegiance to the Constitution of India as also to the principles of socialism,
secularism and democracy and that the association would uphold the
Signature Not Verified
Signed By:NEELAM
SHARMA
Signing Date:22.05.2026
10:48:38
W.P.(C) 7019/2026 Page 4 of 15
sovereignty, unity and integrity of India. Thus, so far as the registration of
an association or a body of individual citizens as a political party is
concerned, Section 29-A provides certain requirements to be completed,
whereupon the Election Commission is permitted to call upon such other
particulars as may be deemed fit from the association and after consideration
of all the particulars, the Election Commission shall communicate its
decision whether to register or not to register such association as a political
party.
11. The issue relating to deregistration of a political party has been the
subject matter of consideration by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Indian
National Congress (I) v. Institute of Social Welfare (2002) 5 SCC 685.
After considering the scheme, as set out in Part IVA of the R.P. Act, the
Hon’ble Supreme Court in the said case has categorically held that,
“ Deregistration of a political party is a serious matter as it involves
divesting of the party of the statutory status of a registered political party.
We are, therefore, of the view that unless there is express power of review
conferred upon the Election Commission, the Commission has no power
to entertain or enquire into the complaint of deregistering a political party
for having violated the constitutional provisions. ”
12. The Hon’ble Supreme Court has, however, carved out three
exceptions, where the Election Commission can review its order registering
a political party. According to the said judgment, the exceptions are:
i. where a political party has obtained its registration by playing
fraud on the Commission;
Signature Not Verified
Signed By:NEELAM
SHARMA
Signing Date:22.05.2026
10:48:38
W.P.(C) 7019/2026 Page 5 of 15
ii. the need of deregistration arises out of sub-section (9) of Section
29-A of the R.P. Act, which provides that after an association has
been registered as a political party, any change in its name, head
office, office-bearers, address or in any other material matters
shall be communicated to the Election Commission without
delay; and
iii. any like ground where no enquiry is required on the part of the
Election Commission, for example, where the political party
concerned is declared unlawful by the Central Government under
the provision of Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967 or
any other similar law.
13. Paragraph Nos. 32 and 33 of the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme
Court in Indian National Congress (I) ( supra ) are extracted below:
“32. This matter may be examined from another angle. If the
directions of the High Court for considering the complaint of the
respondent that some of the appellant political parties are not
functioning in conformity with the provisions of Section 29-A is to be
implemented, the result will be that a detailed enquiry has to be
conducted where evidence may have to be adduced to substantiate
or deny the allegations against the parties. Thus, a lis would arise.
Then there would be two contending parties opposed to each other
and the Commission has to decide the matter of deregistration of a
political party. In such a situation the proceedings before the
Commission would partake the character of quasi-judicial
proceeding. Deregistration of a political party is a serious matter as
it involves divesting of the party of the statutory status of a
registered political party. We are, therefore, of the view that unless
there is express power of review conferred upon the Election
Commission, the Commission has no power to entertain or enquire
into the complaint for deregistering a political party for having
violated the constitutional provisions.
Signature Not Verified
Signed By:NEELAM
SHARMA
Signing Date:22.05.2026
10:48:38
W.P.(C) 7019/2026 Page 6 of 15
33. However, there are three exceptions where the Commission can
review its order registering a political party. One is where a
political party obtained its registration by playing fraud on the
Commission, secondly, it arises out of sub-section (9) of Section 29-
A of the Act and thirdly, any like ground where no enquiry is called
for on the part of the Election Commission, for example, where the
political party concerned is declared unlawful by the Central
Government under the provision of the Unlawful Activities
(Prevention) Act, 1967 or any other similar law.”
14. Summing up the power of the Election Commission in relation to
derecognition of a political party, the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Paragraph
No. 41 of the judgment in Indian National Congress (I) ( supra ) has
observed as under:
“41. To sum up, what we have held in the foregoing paragraph is as
under:
1. That there being no express provision in the Act or in the
Symbols Order to cancel the registration of a political party,
and as such no proceeding for deregistration can be taken by
the Election Commission against a political party for having
violated the terms of Section 29-A(5) of the Act on the
complaint of the respondent.
2. The Election Commission while exercising its power to
register a political party under Section 29-A of the Act, acts
quasi-judicially and decision rendered by it is a quasi-
judicial order and once a political party is registered, no
power of review having been conferred on the Election
Commission, it has no power to review the order registering
a political party for having violated the provisions of the
Constitution or for having committed breach of undertaking
given to the Election Commission at the time of registration.
3. However, there are exceptions to the principle stated in
paragraph 2 above where the Election Commission is not
deprived of its power to cancel the registration. The
exceptions are these:
Signature Not Verified
Signed By:NEELAM
SHARMA
Signing Date:22.05.2026
10:48:38
W.P.(C) 7019/2026 Page 7 of 15
(a) where a political party has obtained registration by
practising fraud or forgery;
(b) where a registered political party amends its
nomenclature of association, rules and regulations
abrogating therein conforming to the provisions of
Section 29-A(5) of the Act or intimating the Election
Commission that it has ceased to have faith and
allegiance to the Constitution of India or to the
principles of socialism, secularism and democracy or it
would not uphold the sovereignty, unity and integrity of
India so as to comply with the provisions of Section 29-
A(5) of the Act; and
(c) any like ground where no enquiry is called for on the
part of the Commission.
4. The provisions of Section 21 of the General Clauses Act
cannot be extended to the quasi-judicial authority. Since the
Election Commission while exercising its power under
Section 29-A of the Act acts quasi-judicially, the provisions of
Section 21 of the General Clauses Act have no application.”
15. Accordingly, the law as settled by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in
Indian National Congress (I) ( supra ) is that no proceeding for
deregistration can be taken by the Election Commission against a political
party for having violated the terms of Section 29-A(5) of the R.P. Act on the
complaint of any person for the reason that there does not exist any express
provision in the R.P. Act for the said purpose. It has further been observed
that the Election Commission, while exercising its powers to register a
political party under Section 29-A of the R.P. Act, acts as a quasi-judicial
authority and the decision rendered by it is a quasi-judicial order and once a
political party is registered, no power of review having been conferred on
the Election Commission, the Commission does not enjoy any power to
Signature Not Verified
Signed By:NEELAM
SHARMA
Signing Date:22.05.2026
10:48:38
W.P.(C) 7019/2026 Page 8 of 15
review the order registering a political party for having violated the
provisions of the Constitution or for having committed breach of any
undertaking given to the Election Commission at the time of its registration.
16. The Hon’ble Supreme Court has reiterated in Paragraph No. 41 of the
judgment in Indian National Congress (I) ( supra ), the three exceptions to
the principle that the Election Commission does not enjoy the power of
review under Section 29-A of the R.P. Act for the purposes of deregistering
a political party and the exceptions, as already set out above, are:
i. where a political party has obtained registration by practising
fraud or forgery;
ii. where a registered political party amends its nomenclature of the
association, rules and regulations abrogating therein conforming
to the provisions of Section 29-A(5) of the R.P. Act or intimates
the Election Commission that it has ceased to have faith and
allegiance to the Constitution of India or to the principles of
socialism, secularism and democracy or it would not uphold the
sovereignty, unity and integrity of India so as to comply with the
provisions of Section 29-A(5) of the R.P. Act; and
iii. any like ground, where no enquiry is called for on the part of the
Commission.
17. Thus, if we appropriately appreciate the scheme of Section 29-A of
the R.P. Act, as explained by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Indian
National Congress (I) ( supra ), what we find is that any political party once
registered can be deregistered, of course only in a situation, where it is found
that the registration was obtained by practising fraud on the Election
Signature Not Verified
Signed By:NEELAM
SHARMA
Signing Date:22.05.2026
10:48:38
W.P.(C) 7019/2026 Page 9 of 15
Commission. The political party can also be deregistered in case, (a) it
amends its nomenclature or rules and regulations, which are not in
conformity with the provisions of Section 29-A(5) of the R.P. Act and / or
(b) the political party concerned intimates the Commission that it has ceased
to have faith and allegiance to the Constitution of India or to the principles
of socialism, secularism and democracy and that it would not uphold the
sovereignty, unity and integrity of India.
18. The third situation, where deregistration can be made by the Election
Commission, as enunciated by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Indian
National Congress (I) ( supra ), is any like ground where no enquiry is called
for on the part of the Election Commission, such as where the political party
has been declared to be unlawful under the provision of Unlawful Activities
(Prevention) Act, 1967 or any other similar law.
19. The submission, on behalf of the Petitioner, in respect of prayer (a),
where a direction has been sought to be issued to the Election Commission
to deregister Respondent No. 3 as a political party, is that on account of
certain observations made by this Court in its judgment dated 20.04.2026
passed in Crl.Rev.P. 134/2026 against Respondent Nos. 4, 5 and 6, who are
the members and officer-bearers of the political party, the Election
Commission can be issued such a direction for derecognising the political
party for the reason that in view of the said observations made by this Court
in the aforesaid judgment, the political party has incurred derecognition as
its members and officer-bearers have acted against the Constitution and,
therefore, they cannot be said to continue to have allegiance to the
Constitution. The submission, in fact, is that such observations made by this
Signature Not Verified
Signed By:NEELAM
SHARMA
Signing Date:22.05.2026
10:48:38
W.P.(C) 7019/2026 Page 10 of 15
Court clearly indicate that the members of Respondent No. 3, who are also
the office-bearers, namely Respondent Nos. 4 to 6 are in breach and
violation and abrogation of the provisions of Section 29-A(5) of the R.P. Act
and, therefore, the Election Commission is fully empowered to derecognise
Respondent No. 3 as a political party.
20. Such a submission, in our considered opinion, is too far-fetched. The
situations, where the Election Commission can exercise its powers for
derecognising a political party, has already been elaborately explained by
the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Indian National Congress (I) ( supra ).
21. It is not a case, where the allegations in the Writ Petition are to the
effect that Respondent No. 3 has obtained its registration by practising any
fraud or forgery. It is also not a case, where the Petitioner pleads that
Respondent No. 3 has amended its nomenclature or rules and regulations,
which are not in conformity with the provisions of Section 29-A(5) of the
R.P. Act. Further, we notice that it is also not a case espoused by the
Petitioner that Respondent No. 3 has ever intimated the Election
Commission that it has ceased to have faith and allegiance to the
Constitution or to the principles of socialism, secularism and democracy or
it would not uphold the sovereignty, unity and integrity of India. It is also
not averred by the Petitioner that Respondent No. 3 has been declared
unlawful under any legislation. Thus, so far as the situations, as elaborately
set out in Paragraph No. 31 of the judgment by the Hon’ble Supreme Court
in Indian National Congress (I) ( supra ) are concerned, no such case has
been pleaded by the Petitioner.
Signature Not Verified
Signed By:NEELAM
SHARMA
Signing Date:22.05.2026
10:48:38
W.P.(C) 7019/2026 Page 11 of 15
22. The emphasis of the learned Counsel for the Petitioner is on the
observations made by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in sub-paragraph No. 3(c)
of Paragraph No. 41 of the judgment in Indian National Congress (I)
( supra ), where the Hon’ble Supreme Court has observed that derecognition
is also permissible on any like ground, where no enquiry is called for on the
part of the Commission.
23. We do not find that any such like ground has been urged in this
Petition, so as to attract situation (3), as enumerated in Paragraph No. 41 of
the judgment in Indian National Congress (I) ( supra ) rendered by the
Hon’ble Supreme Court. Admittedly, Respondent No. 3 has not been
declared unlawful under any law.
24. We are also of the opinion that any observation made by this Court in
its judgment dated 20.04.2026 passed in Crl.Rev.P. 134/2026 is to be
understood to be confined only in relation to the subject matter of the said
Criminal Revision Petition and not outside it.
25. At this juncture, the learned Counsel for the Petitioner has strenuously
urged this Court that the manner in which Respondent Nos. 4, 5 and 6 have
conducted themselves in the proceedings of the aforesaid Criminal Revision
Petition, will amount to undermining the authority, majesty and dignity of
this Court and, therefore, such ground will suffice for the Election
Commission to consider derecognition of the political party, to which these
individuals belong.
26. In our considered opinion, in a situation where any such conduct or
act is found and established where any individual is found to have
undermined the dignity or authority of the Court, appropriate course in law,
Signature Not Verified
Signed By:NEELAM
SHARMA
Signing Date:22.05.2026
10:48:38
W.P.(C) 7019/2026 Page 12 of 15
if the situation so warrants, is available under the Contempt of Court Act,
1971. Such observations made by this Court in its judgment dated
20.04.2026 passed in Crl.Rev.P. 134/2026, in our opinion, cannot be the
basis of asking the Election Commission to initiate the process of
derecognition of Respondent No. 3 under Section 29-A(5) of the R.P. Act.
We may reiterate that the entire submission made in respect of prayer (i) of
the Writ Petition is not only too far-fetched but is also highly misconceived
and misplaced.
27. So far as prayer (ii) of the Writ Petition whereby a direction has been
sought to be issued to the Election Commission for declaring Respondent
Nos. 4 to 6 as disqualified from contesting the elections either to the
Parliament or the State Assembly is concerned, we may note that much
emphasis has been laid by the learned Counsel for the Petitioner upon the
provisions contained in Article 84(c) of the Constitution, according to which
a person shall not be qualified to be a Member of the Parliament unless he
possesses such other qualification, as may be prescribed by law made by the
Parliament. The submission is that since Respondent Nos. 4 to 6, in view of
the judgment passed by this Court dated 20.04.2026 passed in Crl.Rev.P.
134/2026, do not have any allegiance to the Constitutional provisions, as
such they are bereft of the qualification as prescribed by the Act of the
Parliament namely, Representation of the People Act, 1951 in Section 29-A
(5) of the said Act. Such submission, is again far-fetched and bereft of any
consideration.
28. We may also refer to Section 7(b) of the R.P. Act, which defines the
expression ‘disqualified’ occurring in the R.P. Act, according to which
Signature Not Verified
Signed By:NEELAM
SHARMA
Signing Date:22.05.2026
10:48:38
W.P.(C) 7019/2026 Page 13 of 15
disqualified means, ‘ disqualified for being chosen as, and for being, a
Member of either House of the Parliament or of the Legislative Assembly
or Legislative Council of a State under the provisions of Chapter III of the
R.P. Act and on no other ground ’. A person convicted of certain offences,
as described in Section 8 of the R.P. Act, thus, incurs disqualification either
for being chosen or for being a Member of either House of Parliament or of
the Legislative Assembly or Legislative Council of a State. Sections 9, 9A,
10 and 10A of the R.P. Act also lay down certain situations, where a person
incurs disqualification either for being chosen or for being a Member of
either House of Parliament or of the Legislative Assembly or Legislative
Council of a State.
29. In the Writ Petition, no pleadings have been made seeking the prayer
for issuing a direction to the Election Commission for declaring Respondent
Nos. 4 to 6 as disqualified from contesting the elections to Parliament / State
Assembly, in terms of the provisions, as enumerated in Sections 8, 9, 9A, 10
and 10A of the R.P. Act.
30. We may further observe that the question of disqualification from
contesting the elections will arise only once any elections are held and
Respondent Nos. 4 to 6 set up their candidature for such elections.
31. Even otherwise, we may reiterate that the judgment passed by this
Court dated 20.04.2026 passed in Crl.Rev.P. 134/2026, has to be read for the
purposes of the issue involved in the said Criminal Revision Petition and not
for any other purpose.
32. We may also refer to certain observations made in Paragraph 35 of the
judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Indian National
Signature Not Verified
Signed By:NEELAM
SHARMA
Signing Date:22.05.2026
10:48:38
W.P.(C) 7019/2026 Page 14 of 15
Congress (I) ( supra ), wherein a categorical observation has been made by
the Hon’ble Supreme Court that, “ The ancillary and incidental power of
the Commission cannot be extended to a case where a registered political
party admits that it has faith in the Constitution and principles of
socialism, secularism and democracy, but some people repudiate such
admission and call for an enquiry by the Election Commission, reason
being, an incidental and ancillary power of a statutory authority is not the
substitute of an express power of review. ”
33. There is nothing on record, which can establish that Respondent No.
3, as a political party, has anywhere admitted that it does not have faith in
the Constitution or in the principles of socialism, secularism and democracy.
Thus, in view of the aforesaid observations made by the Hon’ble Supreme
Court in Indian National Congress (I) ( supra ), we are not convinced with
the submissions made by the learned Counsel for the Petitioner.
34. The Writ Petition, thus, is bereft of any merit, which resultantly is
hereby dismissed.
35. There shall be no order as to costs.
DEVENDRA KUMAR UPADHYAYA, CJ
TEJAS KARIA, J
MAY 20, 2026
“shailndra”/ “sms”
Signature Not Verified
Signed By:NEELAM
SHARMA
Signing Date:22.05.2026
10:48:38
W.P.(C) 7019/2026 Page 15 of 15