India News | Delhi HC Rejects Plea Against AIMIM's Registration as Political Party
Get latest articles and stories on India at LatestLY. The Delhi High Court has rejected a petition that sought the quashing of the registration granted to All India Majlis-e-Ittehadul Musalimeen (AIMIM) as a political party by the Election Commission of India (ECI). The court upheld the legality of the party's registration, dismissing the challenge against it.
New Delhi [India], November 21 (ANI): The Delhi High Court has rejected a petition that sought the quashing of the registration granted to All India Majlis-e-Ittehadul Musalimeen (AIMIM) as a political party by the Election Commission of India (ECI). The court upheld the legality of the party's registration, dismissing the challenge against it.
Petitioner Tirupathi Narshima Murari challenged the Election Commission of India's (ECI) decision to register and recognize AIMIM as a political party.
The petitioner argued that AIMIM does not meet the requirements set out under Section 29A of the Representation of the People Act, 1951.
The petitioner contended that AIMIM's constitution primarily seeks to advance the interests of a single religious community--Muslims--thereby violating the secular principles mandated by the Constitution and the Act, which require all political parties to adhere to the principles of secularism.
Also Read | Delhi Assembly Elections 2025: AAP Declares 11 Candidates in First List, Know All About the Nominees.
The court observed that the purpose of defining "corrupt practices" is to address disputes during the election process, including election petitions and the disqualification of candidates under Section 8A of the Representation of the People Act.
It further clarified that the provisions of Section 123 of the Act are not relevant to the criteria for registering a political party, but are instead concerned with the outcome of specific elections and the disqualification of individuals from participating in the electoral process. Therefore, the court rejected the petitioner's argument based on Section 123. (ANI)
(This is an unedited and auto-generated story from Syndicated News feed, LatestLY Staff may not have modified or edited the content body)