Supreme Court Refuses To Entertain PIL Challenging Use Of Acronym 'I.N.D.I.A.' By Opposition Alliance

The Supreme Court today refused to entertain a Public Interest Litigation filed under Article 32 of the Constitution seeking directions against 26 political parties, restraining them from using “I.N.D.I.A.” or any other similar surrogate name as an acronym for Indian National Development Inclusive Alliance, the opposition alliance.

The Bench of Justice Sanjay Kishan Kaul and Justice Sudhanshu Dhulia questioned the locus standi of the Petitioner and remarked, "Who are you to file this? This seems to be purely a publicity interest litigation." The Bench further said, "If you have any grievances, you should approach the Election Commission and allow them to take appropriate actions."

Advocate-on-Record Dhawal Uniyal, representing the petitioner, urged the Court to consider the case on its merits and submitted, "Why are these respondent political parties using 'I.N.D.I.A,' which goes against the principles of the Constitution of India?" He further requested the Court to direct the Election Commission to remove the name being utilized by the opposing alliance.

Uniyal also informed the Court that Delhi High Court had issued notice in a similar matter. Justice Kaul, declining to entertain the matter, warned the petitioner to either withdraw the PIL or face its dismissal. "You can either withdraw it voluntarily, or we will dismiss it", the Judge said.

When the Counsel persisted with his arguments, the Court interjected and dictated an order, "We are not inclined to entertain this Petition under Article 32 of the Constitution."

The Counsel then requested the Court's permission to withdraw the plea, to which Justice Dhulia responded, "We provided you with that option earlier." However, the Court further said in its order, "At this stage, the learned counsel seeks to withdraw the matter. Therefore, the Petition is dismissed as withdrawn."

In the Petition filed by Rohit Kheriwal, who is an Advocate, a direction was sought to the alliance of 26 parties for refraining from using the word “I.N.D.I.A.,” which refers to the (Indian National Democratic Inclusive Alliance) as the name of their alliance for the campaigning and advertisements in the upcoming general Lok Sabha elections 2024.

The plea says that the Emblems and Names (Prevention of Improper Use) Act of 1950 prohibits the registration of the name, “INDIA” and if it is prohibited to use the same as a name of any organization or institution or company, "it is morally wrong to tongue-twist the said law and use it for ulterior motives".

It further stated that the leaders and the party workers are now using the name of our nation in a way which undermines the dignity and integrity of the nation. "Since the formation of the alliance, the national media, YouTube channels, general public at large, several party workers and the leaders of the Alliance of 26 parties are using the slogans like “It’s going to be NDA vs. INDIA in 2024”, “PM Modi vs. INDIA”, “BJP, can you challenge INDIA” and several other such similar and slogans which are directly or indirectly tarnishing the unity, dignity and most importantly the integrity of our nation in national and international media, only to misuse the name of the nation to gain power", reads the PIL.

Recently, the Delhi High Court issued notice to 26 political parties and the Election Commission of India (ECI) on a Public Interest Litigation filed challenging the use of I.N.D.I.A. as an acronym for Indian National Development Inclusive Alliance, the opposition alliance. The petitioner in that case is a social activist.

Cause Title: Rohit Kheriwal v. Election Commission Of India & Ors. [W.P.(C) No. 000780 - / 2023]