No Requirement Of Any Educational Qualification For Contesting Election As MP Or MLA; Law’s Flaw Or Pure Politics?: Punjab & Haryana HC

The Punjab and Haryana High Court noted that even today there no requirement of any educational qualification for contesting election to the post of Member of Parliament or Member of Legislative Assembly. 

The Court was hearing a Criminal Revision filed under Section 397 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 against the impugned order where the complaint filed by the petitioner under Section 125-A of the Representation of People Act, 1951 and Sections 177, 193, 465, 420, 467, 468 and 471 IPC was dismissed at preliminary stage under Section 203 Cr.P.C.

The bench of Justice Mahabir Singh Sindhu observed, “…till date, in our country, for contesting an election as an MLA or MP, there is no requirement of any educational qualification.”

Advocate K.S. Khehar appeared for the Appellant and Senior Advocate R. S. Rai appeared for the Respondent.

Brief Facts-

The Petitioner filed a complaint against the respondent Narbir Singh, a Haryana Cabinet Minister alleging that the respondent provided contradictory information in affidavits submitted during elections in 2005 and 2014 regarding his educational qualifications. The Petitioner discovered through RTI that the University mentioned in the affidavits did not exist. The Petitioner complained to the Election Commission after which the Election Commission informed the Petitioner to approach the Court for redressal of his grievance under Section 125-A of the Representation of Peoples Act, 1951. He sought action under the Representation of the People Act and IPC sections for submitting false information. The Judicial Magistrate reviewed the evidence and dismissed the complaint. The Petitioner approached the High Court with the present Revision Petition.

The Court quoted the regrets that were listed by Dr. Rajendra Prasad, the president of the constituent assembly on 26th November 1949, before adopting the Constitution of India, “There are only two regrets which I must share with the honourable Members. I would have liked to have some qualifications laid down for members of the Legislatures. It is anomalous that we should insist upon high qualifications for those who administer or help in administering the law but none for those who make it except that they are elected. A law giver requires intellectual equipment but even more than that capacity to take a balanced view of things, to act independently and above all to be true to those fundamental things of life---in one word---to have character (Hear, hear). It is not possible to devise any yard-stick for measuring the moral qualities of a man and so long as that is not possible, our Constitution will remain defective. The other regret is that we have not been able to draw up our first Constitution of a free Bharat in an Indian language. The difficulties in both cases were practical and proved insurmountable. But that does not make the regret any the less poignant.”

“A period of about 75 years has been consumed; but till date, the “first regret” is waiting for amelioration. Even as on today, there is no requirement of any educational qualification for becoming a Cabinet Minister; or Member of Parliament (M.P); and/or Member of Legislative Assembly (M.L.A) in our country.”, the Court expressed disappointment.

“Is it law’s flaw; and/or pure politics? Or Both of above? But it is very difficult to comprehend for a commoner!”, the Court said. 

The Court said that if the Institute from which the respondent had completed his degree is subsequently found to be not recognised by the UGC, then the respondent being a genuine student, who completed his education from such Institute, cannot be prosecuted for obtaining the degrees in due course.

Accordingly, the Court dismissed the present Revision Petition.