Praying for poll success isn’t seeking votes in religion’s name: HC

Justice N J Jamadar held that “dua” is essentially a form of communication with God and that praying for success in an election “neither amounts to exercise of undue influence nor soliciting votes in the name of the religion” under the Representation of the People Act

MUMBAI: Seeking divine blessings or offering “dua” for electoral success during a campaign does not amount to soliciting votes on religious grounds or constitute a corrupt electoral practice, the Bombay high court has ruled while dismissing a petition challenging the election of All India Majlis-e-Ittehadul – Muslimeen (AIMIM) MLA and cleric Mufti Mohammad Ismail from the Malegaon Central assembly constituency.

Praying for poll success isn’t seeking votes in religion’s name: HC

Justice N J Jamadar held that “dua” is essentially a form of communication with God and that praying for success in an election “neither amounts to exercise of undue influence nor soliciting votes in the name of the religion” under the Representation of the People Act.

The court dismissed an election petition filed by defeated candidate Shaikh Asif Shaikh Rashid, who had sought to set aside Ismail’s election alleging that the latter misused his position as Imam of Jama Masjid and Eidgah at Malegaon by leading prayers for his electoral victory and asking followers to pledge support during the 2024 assembly elections.

Rashid has alleged that Ismail “has influenced the minds of the voters with threat of divine displeasure or spiritual censure.”

He also alleged that Ismail’s campaign managers had delivered speeches appealing to religious sentiments and sought votes on religious grounds, amounting to corrupt electoral practices.

“These speeches amount to corrupt practices as the votes were sought on the ground of religion and appealing to religious sentiments of the electorate and has materially affected the election results”, Rashid claimed.

Ismail denied the allegations, contending that they were vague and baseless and that seeking “dua” or divine blessings could not be construed as soliciting votes in the name of religion and added that a “democratically elected person cannot be unseated in a light manner.”

Holding that prayers for electoral success cannot be equated with seeking votes in the name of religion, the court said the petition lacked the material particulars necessary to establish corrupt electoral practices.

“The prayer for success in the electoral fray, or invocation of the blessings of the God or deity has neither the trappings of soliciting the votes on the ground of religion of the candidate, nor it amounts to marring the prospect of the rival candidate with reference to his religion. Even otherwise, it defies comprehension that the invocation of the blessings by praying for electoral success would amount to a corrupt practice”, the judge said.

The court also observed that the petition failed to establish that the “offending” speeches made by Ismail’s campaigners were authorised and assented to by him.

Finding that the petition lacked material facts and particulars to substantiate allegations of corrupt practices or promotion of religious enmity, the court dismissed it at the threshold.