BRIJESH KUMAR, J. - (1.) This petition has been filed Kunwar Raghuraj Pratap Singh alias Raja Bhaiya with the prayer that a direction be issued to the Chief Election Commissioner of India, summoning the records and the order dated.9-2-1998 by which directions have been given for the petitioner to withdraw from the District of Pratapgarh. There is also a prayer for quashing of the direction or order of the Chief Election Commissioner. Yet another prayer is that the opposite parties be directed not to interfere in any manner with the right of the petitioner to visit Pratapgarh or any other place of his choice pending elections or in connection with the discharge of his obligations as Minister of U.P. Government.
(2.) We have heard the learned counsel, for thepetitioner as well as the counsel for the union of India and the State of U.P. A short counter affidavit has also been filed on behalf of the Chief Election Commissioner of India. An application for implement has also been moved on behalf of one Rajkumari Ratna Singh. We have heard the learned counsel for the applicant Rajkumari Ratna Singh as well.Shri. R.N. Trivedi, appearing for the petitioner, submitted that the petitioner has been directed to keep away from District Pratapgarh without there being any order to that effect by any authority including the Election Commission. It has also been submitted that even if there is any such restriction, it is beyond the scope of Art.324 (1) of the constitution, which does not empower the Election Commission to extern a person without complying with the provisions of law and in violation of his fundamental rights regarding freedom of movements, which also amounts to curtailment of liberty of petitioner. It is further submitted that eventhough the Election Commission is possessed of wide powers under Art.324 of the Constitution to ensure and fair conduct of poll, yet there are limitations to the exercise of said powers. It is not unlimited. The contention is that the Election Commission is entitled to issue directions where there is no law operating in the field where the law is already existing, it would not be open for the commission to issue directions more particularly which may run contrary to the existing laws as this would affect the Rule of Law.
(3.) In the short counter affidavit filed on behalf of the Commission, their case is that the District Magistrate and the Superintendent of Police, Pratapgarh jointly submitted a report dated 4-2-1998 to the Principal Secretary, Home, U.P. Government mentioning involvement of the petitioner in serious cases and the recurrence of similar behaviour may disturb peaceful conduct of election. Since the Election Commission of India is under obligation to conduct free and fair poll, it sent a communication dated 6-2-1998 through the Deputy Election Commissioner to Chief Secretary, U.P. Government enquiring about the steps contemplated to ensure that such incidents do not recur in future., It is further stated that on 11-2-1998, taking into consideration the stock of the situation, the Chief Election Commissioner "orally advised" the State Government to ensure that the petitioner moves out of district Pratapgarh. According to the case taken up in the short counter affidavit, The District Magistrate appraised the petitioner of the concern of the Election Commission about his presence in district Pratapgarh upon which the petitioner assured the district Magistrate that he would leave Pratapgarh on 9-2-1998. The Election Commission also sent to communication dated 10-2-1998 to the State Government saying that discriminatory treatment should not be meted out to the persons belonging to different political parties and some incidents have been indicated where the Government had taken steps by arresting the persons involved in criminal activities eventhough they themselves were the candidates but the same action is not being taken in other cases. All persons should be dealt with, even hands. In Para 10 of the counter affidavit, it is again stated that while the Chief Election Commissioner was on tour to Lucknow on 7th and 8th Feb. 1998, he " orally adviced" the State Government to ensure that till the polling is over, the petitioner should not be present in Pratapgarh constituency. It may be mentioned here that the petitioner belongs to a constituency in Pratapgarh which falls in the Parliament Constituency of Rajkumari Ratna Singh who has applied for being impleaded as one of the opposite parties to the petition. The petitioner is a Minister in the State Government and belongs to Bhartiya Janata Party.;