R- 054

ICFAI LAW SCHOOL

1st VIRTUAL NATIONAL MOOT COURT COMPETITION

BEFORE
SUPREME COURT OF INDIANA
UNDER ARTICLE 32
WRIT PETITION NO._______OF 2021.
PRAVAH CHAKRA…………………………………..PETITIONER
V.
STATE OF PURVA PRADESH……………………….RESPONDENT

PURVA PRADESH…………………………………….. PETITIONER

V.
UNION OF INDIA……………………………………RESPONDENT

ARYAN FOUNDATION………………………………PETITIONER
V.
ELECTION COMMISSION OF INDIA………………RESPONDENT

MEMORANDUM of RESPONDENTS 1
 TABLE OF CONTENTS

LIST OF
ABBREVIATIONS…………………………………………………………………..04
INDEX OF AUTHORITIES…………………………………………………………………...05
STATEMENT OF JURISDICTION…………………………………………………………..07
STATEMENT OF FACTS……………………………………………………………………..08
ISSUES RAISED………………………………………………………………………………..10
SUMMARY OF ARGUMENTS……………………………………………………………….11
ARGUMENTS ADVANCED…………………………………………………………………..13

ISSUE 1 : WHETHER THE PIL FILED BY NGO PRAVAH CHAKRA ON ACCOUNT OF

ALLEGED VIOLENCE IS
MAINTAINABLE?...........................................................................13

1.1. THE PIL FILED BY NGO PRAVAH CHAKRA IS NOT MAINTAINABLE AND IS AN
ATTEMPT TO WASTE THE TIME OF COURT……………………………………………...13
1.2. THE PIL WAS FILED BY NGO PRAVAH CHAKRA TO FULFILL THEIR PERSONAL
VENDETTA AND HENCE DO NOT HAVE LOCUS STANDI TO FILE THIS PIL…………15

ISSUE 2 : WHETHER THE PETITION FILED BY PURVA PRADESH CHALLENGING

THE PRESIDENT’S RULE AND THE DISQUALIFICATION OF MEMBERS OF LDP IS
MAINTAINABLE? ……………………………………………………………………………..17

2.1. THE IMPOSTION OF PRESIDENT’S RULE WAS RIGHT APPROACH FOR THE
STATE OF PURVA
PRADESH…………………………………………………………………………17
2.1.1. THE CONSTITUTIONAL MACHINERY OF PURVA PRADESH FAILED IN ITS
DUTY………………………………………….……………………………………………..…18
2.2. STATE EMERGENCY DOESN’T NEGATE THE FEDERAL CHARACTER OF THE
CONSTITUTION………………………………………………………………………………..19

2
2.3. PRESIDENT’S RULE DOESN’T VIOLATES THE RIGHTS OF THE
CITIZENS………20
2.4. THE SATISFACTION OF THE PRESEDIENT IS IMMUNE FROM JUDICIAL REVIEW
UNLESS IT IS BASED ON EXTRAENOUS CONSIDERATIONS……………………….…..21

ISSUE 3 : WHETHER POSTPONING ELECTIONS IN THE STATE OF VRIHADH

PRADESH WILL GO AGAINST THE SPIRIT OF DEMOCRACY?
……………………………………22

3.1. ELECTIONS CAN BE HELD SAFELY BY THE ELECTION COMMISSION BY

FOLLOWING VARIOUS GUIDELINES……………………………………………………...23
3.2. POSTPONING THE ELECTION FOR A LONGER PERIOD WILL GO AGAINST THE
SPIRIT OF DEMOCRACY…………………………………………………………………….26
PRAYER………………………………………………………………………………………29

3
 LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS

¶ Paragraph
¶¶ Paragraphs
& And
AIR All India Reporter
Anr. Another
CAL Calcatta
Const. Constitution
Etc. Et cetera
HC High Court
Hon’ble Honourable
MANU Manupatra
NHRC National Human Rights Commission
Ors. Others
PIL Public Interest Lititgation
SC Supreme Court
SCC Supreme Court Case
UOI Union of India
v. Versus
WB West Bengal
www. World wide web
UN United Nations

4
 INDEX OF AUTHORITIES
ARTICLES
1. S.Y. Quraishi, Conducting Elections during a Pandemic, THE HINDU (May 08, 2020,
01:44 AM), https://www.thehindu.com/opinion/lead/conducting-elections-during-a-
pandemic/article31529091.ece.

CASES
1. A. K. Roy v. The Union of India
2. Additional District Magistrate v. S. S. Shukla, 1976 AIR 1207
3. Capt. Kanwaljit Singh v. Union Of India, AIR 1991 P H 54
4. Dattaraj Nathuji Thaware vs State Of Maharashtra & Ors on 14 December, 2004,
5. G.V.Vairam Santhosh vs State Of Tamil Nadu on 26 August, 2014
6. Gurpal Singh vs State Of Punjab & Ors on 10 May, 2005
7. H.S. Jain And Ors. v. Union Of India (Uoi) And Ors., (1997) 1 UPLBEC 594
8. Janata Dal vs H.S. Chowdhary And Ors., AIR 1993 SC 892
9. M. Karunnanidhi v. Union of India, 1979 AIR 898
10. Rameshwar Prasad & Ors v. Union Of India & Anr on 24 January, 2006
11. S.P. Gupta v. Union of India (1981 Supp. SCC 87
12. S.R. Bommai v. Union Of India, 1994 AIR 1918, Para 57
13. State Of Rajasthan & Ors. v. Union Of India, 1977 AIR 1361
14. Sunderlal Patwa vs Union Of India And Ors., AIR 1993 MP 214
15. Union of India v. Jyoti Prakash Mitter, 1971 AIR 1093
16. Badri Narayan Singh and Ors. v. The Ministry of Home Affairs, 2020 (4) PLJR 776
17. Romaldo Fernandes v. State of Goa, 2021 SCC OnLine Bom 275
18. Varla Ramaiah v. The State Election Commission, MANU/AP/0390/2021

CONSTITUTION

5
 1. Indian Constitution, 1950.

JOURNALS
1. Toby S. James & Sead Alihodzic, When is it Democratic to postpone an election?
Elections during Natural Disasters, COVID-19, and Emergency situations, 19
ELECTION LAW JOURNAL 344, 344 (2020).

LEGISLATIVE MATERIALS
1. Broad Guidelines for Conduct of General Elections/Bye-Elections during Covid-19,
324.6.EPS.OT.001.2020 (Election Commission of India), Pg. 1-3 (2020).

ONLINE SOURCES
1. INTERNATIONAL IDEA INSTITUTE FOR DEMOCRACY AND ELECTORAL
ASSISTANCE, https://www.idea.int/news-media/multimedia-reports/global-overview-
covid-19-impact-elections (last visited Aug. 31, 2021).
2. THE CONVERSATION, https://theconversation.com/should-elections-be-postponed-
because-of-coronavirus-133819 (last visited Sept. 2, 2021).

6
 STATEMENT OF JURISDICTION

The Petitioners has approached Hon’ble Supreme Court of Indiana by filing a Writ Petition
under Article 32 of the Constitution, invoking the extra ordinary jurisdiction of the Hon’ble
Court. The Respondent reserves the right to challenge the maintainability of the petition.

7
 STATEMENT OF FACTS

1. In 2019, the world was hit by a global pandemic COVID-19 which resulted in lakhs of deaths
across the world. To prevent the spread of COVID-19, various guidelines were issued like
Wearing a mask, cleaning hands, and using hand sanitizer. Nation-wide lockdowns were
imposed in several countries when cases increased. Any type of public gathering was strictly
prohibited.
2. Indiana, an Asian country, was also badly affected by this disease. By the arrival of the
second wave the medical infrastructure had completely collapsed; no beds, ventilators,
oxygen cylinders were available to the citizens. Following this many states in Indiana
imposed complete lockdowns.
3. Meanwhile, in one of the states called Purva Pradesh, general elections for the Legislative
Assembly were scheduled. However, no guidelines were issued by the state to prevent
COVID-19. Huge election campaigns were organized in which thousands of people gathered.
No precautionary measures were followed. Consequently, there was a huge spike in COVID-
19 cases in Purva Pradesh.
4. Soon after the announcement of election results on 2nd June, 2021 large scale violence
erupted in the state. Allegedly supporters and members of the opposition party were prime
victims of the violence. Further it was alleged that many citizens had to leave the state and
take refuge in the neighboring state in order to save their lives.
5. Evidence was presented to show that such violence had a great impact on the economy,
created imbalance in communal harmony and that it created a state of lawlessness in Purva
Pradesh. On the contrary, the winning party alleged that the post poll violence was led by an
opposition party which had its govt at the Centre, to create instability in the state and
therefore create grounds for imposing president’s rule. Amid all the chaos, Mr. Bisham Singh
of Liberal Democratic Party (LDP) was chosen as the chief minister of Purva Pradesh.
6. An NGO Pravah Chakra was attacked by locals of the state when they were visiting violence
affected areas to prepare a report. Following this Pravah Chakra filed a PIL in Supreme Court
against the post-poll violence.

8
7. Purva Pradesh’s Vidhan Sabha consists of 250 seats. 130 seats of which were secured by
LDP, 112 seats by Rashtra Hith Dal (RHD), a major opposition party. Bisham Singh’s
government came into power on 18th June, 2021. However, even after having a regular
government, law and order continued to suffer and a state of lawlessness was seen in Purva
Pradesh.
8. Subsequently, a state emergency was imposed by the President of Indiana on 30th June,
2021. During this period 15 members of LDP joined RHD which made the LDP’s ability to
form a government questionable.
9. Meanwhile, in Virhadh Pradesh where a similar pandemic situation was prevailing, Vidhan
Sabha elections were scheduled to take place in September 2021. Aryan Foundation, an NGO
filed a petition in order to postpone the election.
10. Purva Pradesh filed a petition in Supreme Court to challenge the President’s Rule and
defection of members of ruling party as due to State Emergency, the Legislature of the State
is suspended and the Speaker of the House cannot decide on the disqualification of the
defecting members.
11. The Hon’ble Supreme Court of Indiana clubbed all these petitions and decided to hear them
jointly.

9
 ISSUES RAISED

ISSUE 1:

WHETHER THE PIL FILED BY NGO PRAVAH CHAKRA ON ACCOUNT OF ALLEGED

VIOLENCE IS MAINTAINABLE?

ISSUE 2:

WHETHER THE PETITION FILED BY PURVA PRADESH CHALLENGING THE

PRESIDENT’S RULE AND THE DISQUALIFICATION OF MEMBERS OF LDP IS
MAINTAINABLE?

ISSUE 3:

WHETHER POSTPONING ELECTIONS IN THE STATE OF VRIHADH PRADESH WILL

GO AGAINST THE SPIRIT OF DEMOCRACY?

10
 SUMMARY OF ARGUMENTS

ISSUE 1: WHETHER THE PIL FILED BY NGO PRAVAH CHAKRA ON ACCOUNT

OF ALLEGED VIOLENCE IS MAINTAINABLE?
The PIL filed by the NGO is based on an event which does not exist or is alleged. There is no
definite evidence to prove the violation of a legal or fundamental right of the citizens, and does
not fulfil the conditions of filing a PIL. Hence, [1.1] the PIL filed by the NGO Pravah Chakra
is not maintainable and is an attempt to waste the time of the court and [1.2] the PIL was
filed by NGO Pravah Chakra to fulfill their personal vendetta and hence do not have locus
standi to file this PIL.

ISSUE 2: WHETHER THE PETITION FILED BY PURVA PRADESH CHALLENGING

THE PRESIDENT’S RULE AND THE DISQUALIFICATION OF MEMBERS OF LDP
IS MAINTAINABLE?

Large scale violence erupted in the state of Purva Pradesh soon after the declaration of the results
of legislative assembly elections.1 Subsequently, state emergency was imposed in Purva Pradesh
as the state’s constitutionally machinery failed completely and the government of Purva Pradesh
couldn’t be carried on in accordance with provisions of Constitution of Indiana. The respondent
submits that there was an absolute failure of law and order in the state. Hence, state emergency
was the right approach to curb the prevailing situations in the state [2.1]. When the
proclamation is made having due regard to the current scenario, it cannot be argued that it
negates federal character of the constitution [2.2]. Neither it would amount to violation of
the legal right of citizens to be governed by democratically elected government [2.3]. Lastly,
the respondent submits that subjective satisfaction of the President under Article 356 is
beyond review of the court unless it is based on wholly extraneous considerations [2.4].

1
Moot Proposition, ¶ 4.

11
ISSUE 3: WHETHER POSTPONING ELECTIONS IN THE STATE OF VRIHADH
PRADESH WILL GO AGAINST THE SPIRIT OF DEMOCRACY?

Election in the state of Vrihadh Pradesh can be held by Election Commission by following strict
guidelines in the state without spreading the virus. Several countries have conducted
successful elections by taking strict and several measures. [3.1] If the elections in Vrihadh
Pradesh will be postponed for a longer time it will go against the continuity of our
democratic life [3.2].

12
 ARGUMENTS ADVANCED

ISSUE 1 : WHETHER THE PIL FILED BY NGO PRAVAH CHAKRA ON ACCOUNT

OF ALLEGED VIOLENCE IS MAINTAINABLE?

The PIL filed by the NGO is based on an event which does not exist or is alleged. There is no
definite evidence to prove the violation of a legal or fundamental right of the citizens, and does
not fulfil the conditions of filing a PIL. Hence, [1.1] the PIL filed by the NGO Pravah Chakra is
not maintainable and is an attempt to waste the time of the court and [1.2] the PIL was filed by
NGO Pravah Chakra to fulfill their personal vendetta and hence do not have locus standi to file
this PIL.

1.1. THE PIL FILED BY NGO PRAVAH CHAKRA IS NOT MAINTAINABLE AND IS
AN ATTEMPT TO WASTE THE TIME OF COURT.
I. The expression Public Interest Litigation (“PIL”) is not expressly defined under any
statute or act. Courts have interpreted the expression PIL in S.P. Gupta v. Union of
India.2 In para 22 of the said judgment, the court has observed that,

“Any member of the public with a sufficient interest can bring a judicial action for public
injury resulting from a breach of public duty or a violation of a constitutional or legal
provision, and seek enforcement of such public duty and observance of such
constitutional or legal requirement.”3

The term "litigation" refers to legal action, including all related proceedings, brought in a
court of law with the goal of enforcing a right or seeking a remedy. As a result, lexically,
the term "public interest litigation" refers to a legal action brought in a court of law to
enforce a public interest or general interest in which the public or a class of the

2
AIR 1982 SC 149
3
S.P. Gupta v. Union of India, AIR 1982 SC 149.

13
 community has financial or other stakes that affect their legal rights or liabilities. 4 (Para
53)
II. It is submitted that NGO Pravah Chakra cannot file a PIL for a matter which is not
concerned with public issues or rights. Since there is no evidence that suggests that
citizens were the victims of post-poll violence or that the rights of citizens within the
state were violated at large, the pre-condition for filing a PIL which is an issue of the
public at large is not existing here. Hence, NGO Pravah Chakra cannot file a PIL for the
said matter. Therefore, this PIL is not maintainable prima facie.
III. Further, the Court must be satisfied with (a) the applicant's credentials; (b) the prima
facie validity or nature of the information he provides; and (c) the information not being
ambiguous and indefinite. The data should demonstrate the gravity and seriousness of the
situation.5 In the present case, there is no definite evidence showing that citizens were the
victim of the said post-poll violence. The pieces of evidence merely suggest that violence
was taking place in the state.6 Pravah Chakra has not presented any facts or death toll to
show there was a grave violation of the legal rights of the citizens. Thus, it cannot be
assumed that the violence was severe enough to affect the public at large. Also, since
there is no clarity regarding what those pieces of evidence were, it cannot be assumed
that is citizens were affected as a result of post-poll violence. The PIL in the present case
was filed to fulfill their personal cause.

IV. The concerned PIL does not fulfill the pre-conditions. Despite this fact, NGO Pravah
Chakra has filed the PIL in the apex court to seek remedy for their personal cause. No
litigant has a limitless right to use the Court's time and public funds to settle his problems
in the manner he desires. Access to justice should not be exploited as a license to bring
frivolous and ill-conceived petitions.7

V. Innumerable days are wasted in the Courts as a result of such bogus procedures, time that
could have been spent on the resolution of genuine litigants. Criminally waste the courts'

4
Janata Dal v. H.S. Chowdhary and Ors., AIR 1993 SC 892.
5
Dattaraj Nathuji Thaware v. State Of Maharashtra & Ors on 14 December, 2004, PARA 17
6
Clarifications Q.16.
7
Andhra Pradesh State Financial Corporation v. M/s GAR Re-Rolling Mills and Anr, AIR 1994 SC 2151

14
 valuable time, as a result of which the line outside the court's doors never moves, creating
irritation in the minds of legitimate litigants. 8
VI. When there is evidence that a petition disguised as public interest litigation is nothing
more than a hoax to nurture personal conflicts, the petition will be dismissed. We believe
it is necessary to assess the issue of public interest before dealing with the matter at hand
in this case. Public Interest Litigation, which has grown to be a significant part of the
legal system, should not be referred to as "publicity interest litigation," "private
interest litigation," "political interest litigation," or the latest craze, "paise income
litigation." The litigation must entail a genuine public interest, not just a fantasy tale of a
knight errant created of wishful thinking. It cannot also be invoked by an individual or
group of individuals to pursue their own personal causes or to fulfill personal grudges and
animosity. Unscrupulous litigants should not be allowed to pollute courts of justice by
using exceptional jurisdiction.9

1.2. THE PIL WAS FILED BY NGO PRAVAH CHAKRA TO FULFILL THEIR
PERSONAL VENDETTA AND HENCE DO NOT HAVE LOCUS STANDI TO FILE
THIS PIL.

I. Public interest litigation is a weapon that must be utilized with utmost caution and
circumspection, and the judiciary must be vigilant to ensure that beneath the lovely veil of
public interest, ugly private malice, vested interest, and/or publicity-seeking does not lie.
It should be used as a powerful tool in the legal armory to ensure that citizens receive
social justice. The appealing brand name of public interest litigation should not be applied
to suspicious mischief. It should be focused at redressing a genuine public wrong or
injury, not at generating publicity or based on personal revenge. As previously stated, the
court must ensure that a group of people or a member of the public approaching the court
is acting in good faith and not for personal benefit, private motives, political motivations,
or other indirect concerns.10

8
Gurpal Singh v. State Of Punjab & Ors on 10 May, 2005 para 9
9
Dattaraj Nathuji Thaware v. State Of Maharashtra & Ors on 14 December, 2004, PARA 4
10
Dattaraj Nathuji Thaware v. State Of Maharashtra & Ors SLP (Cl) 26269/2004; G.V. Vairam Santhosh v. State
of Tamil Nadu, Writ Petition No. 12036/2014, decided on 26.08.2014.

15
 II. Referencing to the case of Gurpal Singh v. State Of Punjab & Ors.11 wherein this court
held that,

“Public interest litigation is a weapon which has to be used with great care and
circumspection and the judiciary has to be extremely careful to see that behind the
beautiful veil of public interest an ugly private malice, vested interest and/or publicity
seeking is not lurking. It is to be used as an effective weapon in the armory of law for
delivering social justice to the citizens. The attractive brand name of public interest
litigation should not be allowed to be used for suspicious products of mischief. It should
be aimed at redressal of genuine public wrong or public injury and not publicity oriented
or founded on personal vendetta.”12 (Para 10).

III. NGO Pravah Chakra was attacked by locals of the state when they were visiting violence-
affected areas to prepare a report. 13 There is no dispute on the fact that fundamental rights
of the NGO were violated during the alleged violence in the state, but there is no evidence
present that shows that the citizens were also the victims of that violence. Thus, when
there is nothing to show that the rights of the people were violated at large, one cannot file
a PIL for it. Therefore, the present PIL is filed by NGO Pravah Chakra to fulfill their
personal cause which is seeking remedy against the state as they were beaten by the locals
of the state.

IV. It is also submitted that this petition is filed against violation of rights that does not exist
or is alleged violence. Hence, such a petition lacks locus standi. In S.P. Gupta v. Union of
India,14 it was firmly stated that the relaxation of the locus standi rule in the field of PIL
does not grant any right to a busybody or meddling interloper to approach the Court under
the guise of public interest litigation.

11
Gurpal Singh v. State Of Punjab & Ors, (2005) 5 SCC 136.
12
Gurpal Singh v. State Of Punjab & Ors, (2005) 5 SCC 136.
13
Moot Proposition ¶ 6.
14
S.P. Gupta v. Union of India, AIR 1982 SC 149.

16
V. It goes without saying that a party's locus standi is required since the legal capacity of a
party to any litigation, whether in private or public action, in connection to any specific
remedy sought must be determined first and foremost at the threshold. 15

VI. It follows that only a person acting in good faith and with a sufficient interest in the PIL
proceeding will have a locus standi and be able to approach the court to have the tears of
the poor and needy, who are suffering from violations of their fundamental rights, wiped
away, and not a person acting for personal gain, private profit, political motive, or any
other oblique consideration. Similarly, a vexatious petition placed before the court under
the guise of a PIL to vindicate any personal grievance deserves to be dismissed at the
outset.16 Therefore, the petition filed by NGO Pravah Chakra in the name of PIL is liable
to be dismissed.

ISSUE 2 : WHETHER THE PETITION FILED BY PURVA PRADESH CHALLENGING

THE PRESIDENT’S RULE AND THE DISQUALIFICATION OF MEMBERS OF LDP
IS MAINTAINABLE?
Large scale violence erupted in Purva Pradesh soon after the declaration of the results of
legislative assembly elections.17 Subsequently, the President of Indiana imposed state emergency
in Purva Pradesh after the constitutional machinery failed completely. 18 The respondent submits
that the imposition of president’s rule was the right approach having regard to the prevailing
condition of lawlessness in the state [2.1]. Such imposition doesn’t negate federal character of
the constitution [2.2]. Neither it is violative of the legal right of citizens to be governed by
democratically elected government [2.3]. Lastly, the respondent submits that subjective
satisfaction of the President under Article 356 is beyond review of the court unless it is based on
wholly extraneous considerations [2.4]. Therefore, petition filed by Purva Pradesh challenging
president’s rule is not maintainable.

2.1. THE IMPOSTION OF PRESIDENT’S RULE WAS RIGHT APPROACH FOR THE
STATE OF PURVA PRADESH.

15
Janata Dal v. H.S. Chowdhary And Ors., AIR 1993 SC 892 PARA 62
16
Janata Dal v. H.S. Chowdhary And Ors., AIR 1993 SC 892 PARA 109
17
Moot Proposition, ¶ 4.
18
Moot Proposition, ¶¶ 7 & 8.

17
 I. Immediately, after declaration of the legislative assemble election results, larger scale
violence had erupted in the state. The violence was so grave in nature that the native
citizens of the state had to take refuge in the neighboring states in order to save their
lives.19
II. Government had miserably failed to protect the citizens and property of the State from
internal disturbance, then it becomes the President's constitutional duty to invoke Article
356 if he is reasonably satisfied that the imposition of President's rule in the State is
imminently warranted to ensure that the State's government is carried out. 20
III. Several evidences were produced which suggests the terrible impact of the violence on
economic status of the state. Further, it created great imbalance in communal harmony
leading to an absolute state of lawlessness in Purva Pradesh. 21 Moreover, when NGO
Pravah Chakra came to inspect the violence affected areas and prepare a report on same,
they were also attacked.22 All the above scenario clearly shows that soon after the
declaration of election results a state of lawlessness prevailed. Even after having a regular
government, they were not making any effort to curb the ongoing crisis which led to
suffering of law and order including the citizens.23 The local government of Purva
Pradesh was incompetent to fight back the post-poll violence. Therefore, it can be rightly
argued that constitutional machinery failed to protect the state and its citizens, which is a
pre-condition for imposing state emergency under Article 356 [2.1.1]. Further, the
winning party LDP was not competent to form a government after its 15 of its members
joined RHD [2.1.2.].

2.1.1. THE CONSTITUTIONAL MACHINERY OF PURVA PRADESH FAILED IN ITS

DUTY.
I. The scheme of Article 356 is to deal with the case of failure of constitutional machinery
in States. It is a Proclamation intended to protect a State's constitutional machinery from
failure or to restore the effects of such a failure.24

19
Moot Proposition, ¶ 4.
20
Sunderlal Patwa v. Union of India and Ors., AIR 1993 MP 214
21
Moot Proposition, ¶ 5.
22
Moot Proposition, ¶ 6.
23
Moot Proposition, ¶ 7.
24
H.S. Jain And Ors. v. Union Of India (Uoi) And Ors., (1997) 1 UPLBEC 594

18
 II. As previously state, the factual matrix clearly shows that despite having a regular
government, the state machinery was incompetent to curb the ongoing violence in the
state which created a life threatening environment for its citizens since they were forced
to take refuge in other states.
III. Failure of the Constitutional machinery or a state government that is not operating in the
letter and spirit of the Constitution or in line with its provisions has been regarded an
emergent scenario for which Articles 355, 356 and 357 give solutions. The Union
Government was obligated under Article 355 to ensure that State Governments operated
in line with the Constitution.25
IV. There are three types of emergencies that can create a national crisis. The first occurs
when the country's security is threatened by war or external aggression; the second occurs
when there is a threat or presence of internal disturbance intended to disrupt the country's
life and jeopardise the existence of constitutional government; and the third occurs when
the economy has broken down or is about to break down, posing a threat to financial
stability.26 The present situation of Purva Pradesh falls within the second category of
emergency wherein an internal disturbance was apparent.
V. The governance of Purva Pradesh was not running as per the constitution as large scale
violence had erupted which forms an emergency situation. An emergency is a
circumstance that is out of the ordinary and necessitates immediate response. Article 356
gives the President the power to fulfil the obligation imposed on him by Article 355, in
exceptional circumstances. It is a measure aimed at safeguarding and preserving the
Constitution.27
VI. A mere internal disturbance or armed rebellion, cannot justify the Proclamation under
Article 356(1), unless it disables or prevents the State's government from carrying out its
duties in accordance with the Constitution's provisions. The expression "cannot be carried
on" in clause (1) of Article 356 does not imply that the State's government cannot be
carried on. It simply indicates that a scenario has developed in which the State

25
State Of Rajasthan & Ors. v. Union Of India, 1977 AIR 1361, Para 25
26
Additional District Magistrate v. S. S. Shukla,1976 AIR 1207
27
Rameshwar Prasad & Ors v. Union Of India & Anr on 24 January, 2006

19
 Government's administration cannot be carried out in conformity with the Constitution's
requirements.28
VII. The fact that even after having a regular government in the state, the violence was not
stopped neither any attempt was made by the them to curb the deadly situation suggests
that the proper and necessary governance was not carried out as required by the
constitution. Therefore, there existed an extremely emergent situation requiring
immediate action by the central government. The same was done by President of Indiana
by declaring a state emergency in Purva Pradesh.

2.2. STATE EMERGENCY DOESN’T NEGATE THE FEDERAL CHARACTER OF

THE CONSTITUTION.
I. Federalism is a philosophy that unites sovereign states into a Union without jeopardising
their fundamental political integrity. Separate States desire to unite in order to allow all
member-States to participate in the formation of universally applicable policies and the
implementation of decisions based on those policies. The core of a federation is thus the
presence of the Union and the States, as well as the division of powers between them. As
a result, in a federal arrangement, federalism implies the division of authorities. 29
II. However, the amount of federalism has been diluted for the needs of progress and
development of a country that must be nationally integrated politically and economically
coordinated, and spiritually uplifted. The States cannot, in such a system, stand in the
way of the Central Government's lawful and completely planned growth of the country. 30
III. The federal aspect of the Constitution has been tampered with by the framers of the
Constitution whenever it was seen necessary to maintain the country's unity and integrity,
or for the nation's overall development. The country's unity and integrity cannot be
sacrificed on the altar of federalism. The Union of India is empowered by the
Constitution to issue directions to the States in specific situations. 31
IV. The President's right to take over the administration of States in certain emergencies does
not negate the principle of a state's independence or autonomy. 32 On the floor of the

28
S.R. Bommai v. Union Of India, 1994 AIR 1918, Para 57
29
S.R. Bommai v. Union Of India, 1994 AIR 1918
30
Capt. Kanwaljit Singh v. Union Of India, AIR 1991 P H 54, Para 63
31
Capt. Kanwaljit Singh v. Union Of India, AIR 1991 P H 54, Para 38
32
M. Karunnanidhi v. Union Of India, 1979 AIR 898

20
 Constituent Assembly, Dr. Ambedkar remarked that the Constitution is "both unitary and
federal according to the requirements of time and circumstance." He also asserted that the
Centre would strive for the common good and the country's overall interest, but the States
would work for local interests. 33 Therefore, if state emergency is imposed to protect the
integrity of the country in exceptional situation of emergency, it cannot be held to as an
act which negates or dilutes the federal character.

2.3. PRESIDENT’S RULE DOESN’T VIOLATES THE RIGHTS OF THE CITIZENS.

I. The President's governance as the Executive Head of the Nation during President Rule is
democratic in nature, since the President operates with the assistance and advice of the
Council of Ministers, who are accountable to the House of People as well as their
political Sovereigns, the voters. They are the representatives of the country's citizens.
Further, to have a state assembly in each state isn’t a basic feature under the constitution.
34

II. Further, when a Proclamation of Emergency is in effect, Article 359 grants the President
the authority to declare that the right to file any court for the enforcement of rights
provided by Part III of the Constitution, excluding those conferred by Articles 20 and 21,
is suspended.35
III. Even during the President's Rule, the people, or electorate, are ruled by representatives
who are elected through a democratic process. The rule of the political sovereigns by
lawfully elected representatives to the Parliament in a democratic manner is unaffected. 36
IV. The Union of Indiana has been given the authority to issue instructions when it believes
that the political situation, or any other situation or circumstance, necessitates it in order
to protect citizens' rights, protect the State from external or internal aggression, or keep
the State Government functioning in accordance with the Constitution. Therefore, the
imposition of President Rule cannot be used to claim that citizens are being deprived of
their right to be ruled by legitimately elected representatives or that their right to vote is
being harmed in any way.

33
S.R. Bommai v. Union Of India, Para 14
34
Capt. Kanwaljit Singh v. Union Of India, AIR 1991 P H 54, Para 36
35
S.R. Bommai v. Union of India, 1994 AIR 1918, Para 55
36
Capt. Kanwaljit Singh v. Union Of India, AIR 1991 P H 54, Para 47

21
2.4. THE SATISFACTION OF THE PRESEDIENT IS IMMUNE FROM JUDICIAL
REVIEW UNLESS IT IS BASED ON EXTRAENOUS CONSIDERATIONS.
I. The Proclamation issued under Article 356 is without a doubt open to judicial review.
The discussion is mostly focused on the scope of judicial review or the sphere of
justiciability in that area. At this point that judicial review is concerned with the decision-
making process rather than the decision's merits. 37
II. The President's satisfaction is subjective and cannot be measured using objective
standards. It would largely be a political decision based on an assessment of a variety of
factors, including fast-changing situations, potential consequences, public reaction,
motivations and responses of various classes of people, and their anticipated future
behaviour, among other factors, in light of public affairs experience and pragmatic
management of complex and often bizarre adjustment. As a result, it cannot be a suitable
subject-matter for judicial review by its very nature, and it is left to the subjective
satisfaction of the Central Government, which is best placed to resolve it. But one thing is
certain: if the satisfaction is based on absolute extraneous grounds or irrelevant grounds
or is mala fide, the court would have jurisdiction to review it because the President would
not be satisfied.38
III. A proclamation made under Article 356 of the Constitution is subject to judicial scrutiny
if it is based on reasoning that is completely extraneous, irregular, or unrelated to the
purpose for which the Constitution bestowed the power under Article 356 of the
Constitution. In other words, if there is no "reasonable nexus" between the reasons for the
Proclamation and the President's satisfaction, it is plausible to conclude that the President
did not have "satisfaction" for the lawful exercise of the vast or drastic power conferred
on him under Article 356.39
IV. Further, clause (5) of Article 356 was inserted by the 38th Amendment, which made the
President's satisfaction stated in Clause (1) absolute and conclusive, and that satisfaction
could not be questioned in any Court on any pretext. However, it can be argued that the
Presidential Proclamation is subject to judicial scrutiny on the grounds of illegality,
irrationality, impropriety, or mala fide, or, in short, on the grounds of abuse of power,

37
S.R. Bommai v. Union Of India, 1994 AIR 1918
38
State of Rajasthan v. Union Of India
39
A. K. Roy v. The Union Of India, AIR 1982 SC 710

22
 since clause (5) Article 356 of the Constitution was repealed by the Forty Fourth
Amendment Act of 1978.
V. In the present case, the satisfaction of President of Indiana was not based on wholly
extraneous or irrelevant considerations, neither was a mala fide action as the declaration
under Article 356 was made after taking into consideration the prevailing situation in
Pradesh Pradesh. Therefore, President’s satisfaction for imposing emergency is beyond
judicial review except in case of mala fide exercise or when it is based on irrelevant
grounds which have no nexus to the objective sought to be achieved when a state
emergency is declared under Article 356 of the constitution.

ISSUE 3 : WHETHER POSTPONING ELECTIONS IN THE STATE OF VRIHADH

PRADESH WILL GO AGAINST THE SPIRIT OF DEMOCRACY?
In the present argument, Election Commission provides various guidelines and measures which
it can follow for holding the elections successfully in the state of Vrihadh Pradesh. Holding
periodic and regular elections is an important of democracy and if we keep postponing the
elections it will affect the democracy of the country.

3.1. ELECTIONS CAN BE HELD SAFELY BY THE ELECTION COMMISSION BY

FOLLOWING VARIOUS GUIDELINES.

I. It is not necessary that whatever happened in the state of Purva Pradesh will happen in
Vrihadh Pradesh as well. Elections in the state of Vrihadh Pradesh can be safely held by
following various strict guidelines. We are now seeing a clear trend from postponing
towards holding elections, although with mitigation measures. There are many examples
of resilient and resourceful election management bodies and citizens who have adapted
to new conditions in short timeframes. How efforts to build consensus around decisions
about the electoral process, efforts to strengthen special voting arrangements, efforts to
effectively communicate the safety measures adopted, have resulted in high voter turn-
out and renewed trust in the electoral system.40

40
INTERNATIONAL IDEA INSTITUTE FOR DEMOCRACY AND ELECTORAL ASSISTANCE,
https://www.idea.int/news-media/multimedia-reports/global-overview-covid-19-impact-elections (last visited Aug.
31, 2021).

23
 II. We see that the increase in the number of cases may be attributed to the increase in
testing in the State. There is nothing to show that the Election Commission is refusing to
take stock of the corona virus situation in the current situation of Vrihadh Pradesh. There
is nothing to show that the Election Commission is failing to take responsibility/the
possibility of spread of the disease. 41

III. The EC could take into account the successful examples like that of South Korea which
took several measures to prepare a proper plan for holding elections. South Korea
conducted its election by disinfecting polling centres, and mandating voters practice
physical distancing, wear gloves and masks and use hand sanitizer. Voters had their
temperatures checked on arrival at the booths. Those who had a temperature above 99.5
degrees Fahrenheit were sent to booths in secluded areas. Covid-19-positive voters were
allowed to mail their ballots, while self-quarantined voters were allowed to vote after 6
p.m.42

IV. EC will have to ensure strict implementation of the Health Ministry’s guidelines.
Knowing the EC’s capabilities and years of experience, this will be a cakewalk. South
Korea conducted its national election with 44 million voters in the midst of the
pandemic. It is a good source of inspiration for the EC. Among them is South Korea,
which, under strict guidelines, managed to pull off a near-perfect national election
recording the highest voter turnout of 66.2% in 28 years. The EC could adopt targeted
measures for older voters who are more vulnerable to COVID-19. Options like proxy
voting under a well-established legal framework, postal voting, and mobile ballot boxes
can be explored. 43

GENERAL GUIDELINES WHICH CAN BE FOLLOWED DURING ENTIRE

ELECTION PROCESSES FOR ALL PERSONS:

41
Badri Narayan Singh and Ors. v. The Ministry of Home Affairs, 2020 (4) PLJR 776.
42
S.Y. Quraishi, Conducting Elections during a Pandemic, THE HINDU (May 08, 2020, 01:44 AM),
https://www.thehindu.com/opinion/lead/conducting-elections-during-a-pandemic/article31529091.ece.
43
Id. at 2.

24
 i. At the entry of hall/ room/ premises used for election purposes:
 Thermal Scanning of all persons shall be carried out;
 Sanitizer, soap and water shall be made available.
 Social distancing shall be maintained as per the extant COVID-19 guidelines of the
State Govt. and Ministry of Home Affairs.
 As far as practicable, large halls should be identified and utilized to ensure social
distancing norms.
ii. Nodal Health Officer shall be designated for the State, the District and the Assembly
Constituency to oversee COVID-19 related arrangements and, preventive measures
during entire electoral process.
iii. First & Second randomization and preparation of EVMs/VVPATs shall be done in large
halls.
iv. Training for election officials may be organized through online mode.
v. All PPTs, training materials, relevant documents, topic wise video clips, question papers
for self-assessment may be uploaded in app/ portal so that any election official can access
it as per requirement.
vi. Sufficient number of Polling/Counting/Poll related staffs shall also be kept in reserve by
DEO/RO, to replace in case any polling personnel displays COVlD-l9 symptoms.
vii. Nomination form will also be available online on the website of CEO/ DEO. An
intending candidate may fill in it online and its print may be taken for submitting before
the Returning Officer as specified in Form-1 (Rule-3 of Conduct of Election Rules 1961).
viii. Affidavit may also be filled in online on the website of CEO/DEO and its print can be
taken and after notarization it may be submitted along with the nomination form before
the Returning Officer.
ix. Candidate may deposit security money through online mode at the designated platform.
However, a candidate will continue to have the option of deposit in cash in the treasury.
x. Further, Commission has directed: Number of persons to accompany candidate for
submission of Nomination is restricted to two (2). (This is in supersession of existing
Para 5.8.1 of Returning Officer’s Handbook 2019)
xi. Number of vehicles for the purposes of nomination is restricted to two (2). (This is in
supersession of existing Para 5.8.1 of Returning Officer’s Handbook 2019)

25
 xii. Returning Officer’s chamber should have sufficient space to perform the functions of
nomination, scrutiny and symbol allocation following social distancing norms.
xiii. Returning Officer should allot staggered time in advance to prospective candidates.
xiv. Large space for waiting for candidate(s) should be arranged.
xv. All steps required to be taken for the submission of nomination form and affidavit shall
continue to operate as per the provisions contained in the Representation of the People
Act, 1951.
xvi. Prior staggered time should be allocated to the polling teams for distribution/ collection
of election material.
xvii. There shall be maximum 1000 electors instead of 1500 electors in a polling station.
xviii. If temperature is above the set norms of MoHFW at first reading, then it will be checked
twice and if it remains, then the elector shall be provided with token/certificate and will
be asked to come for voting at the last hour of poll. At the last hour of poll, such electors
shall be facilitated voting, strictly following COVID-19 related preventive measures.
xix. Help Desk for distribution of token to the voters of first come first basis so that they do
not wait in the queue.
xx. Marker to demonstrate social distancing for queue.
xxi. If temperature is above the set norms of MoHFW at first reading, then it will be checked
twice and if it remains, then the elector shall be provided with token/certificate and will
be asked to come for voting at the last hour of poll. At the last hour of poll, such electors
shall be facilitated voting, strictly following COVID-19 related preventive measures.
xxii. Marker to demonstrate social distancing for queue.44

3.2. POSTPONING THE ELECTION FOR A LONGER PERIOD WILL GO AGAINST

THE SPIRIT OF DEMOCRACY.

a. One of the defining characteristics of a democracy is that it holds regular, periodic

elections. This requirement was famously enshrined into Article 21(3) of the Universal
Declaration of Human Rights (UN General Assembly 1948). 45

44
Broad Guidelines for Conduct of General Elections/Bye-Elections during Covid-19, 324.6.EPS.OT.001.2020
(Election Commission of India), Pg. 1-3 (2020).
45
Toby S. James & Sead Alihodzic, When is it Democratic to postpone an election? Elections during Natural
Disasters, COVID-19, and Emergency situations, 19 ELECTION LAW JOURNAL 344, 344 (2020).

26
 b. Elections are the central institution of democratic representative governance, since in
the democratic set up, the authority of the Government derives solely from the concept of
the governed. The principal mechanism for translating that consent into governmental
authority is the holding of free and fair elections. Democratically elected nations
burgeon on absolutely free and impartial elections and Indiana being a
colossal democracy demands such a process. 46
c. French president Emmanuel Macron considered cancelling mayoral and municipal
elections, but later judged that they should take place as planned “to ensure the
continuity of our democratic life”. Postponing a vote could however, mean that leaders
and representatives who are not necessarily doing a good job will remain in office for
longer. Citizens will be temporarily denied their right to shape public policy – perhaps at
exactly the moment that they need to. 47
d. In some cases, there will be concern that a government may capitalize on a crisis to
avoid holding an election at all. If one is postponed because of corona virus, will it be
rearranged? If so, when? 48According to the experts the pandemic will have its effect for
at least two years, postponing the election for such a long period will go against the spirit
49
of the democracy. Speedy and timely election is the essential requirement of a
parliamentary democracy. The majestic edifice of a parliamentary democracy is
strengthened at its rock bottom by a free, fair and transparent election, be it a Panchayat
poll or Parliament election. All the democratic sovereigns, world over have recognised
the importance of holding periodic elections to various constitutional institutions. 50
e. Postponement should therefore be a last resort so that we can be reassured that
democratic life will continue. Where postponement is on the cards, cross-party
consensus on a clearly agreed timetable for rescheduling is crucial. Democracy relies on
responsible political parties, who should act as custodians for the process and not be
opportunistic.51

46
Romaldo Fernandes v. State of Goa, 2021 SCC OnLine Bom 275.
47
THE CONVERSATION, https://theconversation.com/should-elections-be-postponed-because-of-coronavirus-
133819 (last visited Sept. 2, 2021).
48
Id. at 6.
49
S.Y. Quraishi, Conducting Elections during a Pandemic, THE HINDU (May 08, 2020, 01:44 AM),
https://www.thehindu.com/opinion/lead/conducting-elections-during-a-pandemic/article31529091.ece.
50
Varla Ramaiah v. The State Election Commission, MANU/AP/0390/2021.
51
Id. at 7.

27
 f. Examples of elections that proceeded in April 2021 include: Parliamentary
elections, Bulgaria (4 April 2021), General elections, Samoa (9 April 2021), Local
elections, Maldives (10 April 2021) Local elections and the constitutional
referendum, Kyrgyzstan (11 April 2021), Presidential elections, Chad (11 April 2021),
Presidential and Parliamentary elections, Peru (11 April 2021), Presidential elections,
second round, Ecuador (11 April 2021), General elections, Cayman Islands (14 April
2021), Parliamentary elections, Cape Verde (18 April 2021), Parliamentary
elections, Albania (25 April 2021), Parliamentary by-elections, Japan (25 April 2021). 52
g. The corona virus pandemic is a reminder of the unexpected risks involved in running an
election, albeit on an epic scale. It’s impossible to run an election at a time like this – or
during a natural disaster – without making some compromises. These votes will never
end up being the democratic ideal. But postponing poses risks to democracy,
too. Contingency planning is the best hope of keeping the electoral show on the road. 53
h. Some experts say that the COVID-19 pandemic could last for two years. Deferring
elections for such a long time would be against the spirit of democracy and federalism,
which are the basic components of the Constitution. As a result, holding elections seems
to be the only way out. According to the International Institute for Democracy and
Electoral Assistance, nine countries have already held national elections and
referendums during this public health crisis. 54
i. There is nothing on record to show that Election Commission is/would be unable to
ascertain the fundamental rights to voters--Election Commission has exclusive authority
with respect to framing laws regarding conduct of elections and where there is no law to
cope with some situation within enacted rules, Commission has plenary powers to
exercise their discretion. 55

52
INTERNATIONAL IDEA INSTITUTE FOR DEMOCRACY AND ELECTORAL ASSISTANCE,
https://www.idea.int/news-media/multimedia-reports/global-overview-covid-19-impact-elections (last visited Aug.
31, 2021).
53
THE CONVERSATION, https://theconversation.com/should-elections-be-postponed-because-of-coronavirus-
133819 (last visited Sept. 2, 2021).
54
S.Y. Quraishi, Conducting Elections during a Pandemic, THE HINDU (May 08, 2020, 01:44 AM),
https://www.thehindu.com/opinion/lead/conducting-elections-during-a-pandemic/article31529091.ece.
55
Badri Narayan Singh and Ors. v. The Ministry of Home Affairs, 2020 (4) PLJR 776.

28
 PRAYER

Wherefore, in light of the questions raised, arguments advanced and authorities cited, the
Respondents request the Hon’ble Supreme Court of Indiana to find, adjudge and declare that:

1. The proclamation dated 30th June, 2021 is appropriate and therefore, it should continue.

2. To allow the scheduled elections of Vrihadh Pradesh.

In respectful submission before the Supreme Court of Indiana.

Counsels on behalf of the Respondents.

29