“Rahul’s conviction has been stayed but not quashed. But for now, this has resulted in his disqualification becoming ineffective. The Wayanad seat is no longer vacant,” an election law expert told TOI.
Once the Lok Sabha secretariat receives the court papers, it can issue the reinstatement order at any time.
The immediate precedent of a disqualified MP being reinstated upon stay or suspension of his conviction is that of Lakshadweep MP Mohammed Faizal PP. The NCP MP was disqualified on January 11, 2023, upon his conviction and award of 10 years in prison in an attempt to murder case. On January 13, the LS secretariat notified his disqualification as an MP under Section 8(3) of Representation of the People Act (RP Act), 1951 — the same provision under which Rahul was disqualified.
However, the Kerala HC on January 25, ruling on an appeal filed by Faizal, suspended his conviction and sentence, rendering his disqualification ineffective. Yet, his suspension as an MP was not revoked immediately. It was only when he moved the Supreme Court against the “unlawful action” that the LS secretariat, hours ahead of the March 29 hearing, confirmed that his disqualification had ceased to operate.
Meanwhile, the Election Commission is said to be viewing the SC verdict as a vindication of its decision to wait it out before announcing the bypoll to Wayanad seat.
“In retrospect, it was worth the wait. Had EC conducted the bypoll before the apex court’s decision, it would have been difficult to restore status quo ante. EC may have been accused of being partisan and hasty,” a former EC functionary told TOI on Friday.
Though the EC is required by law to hold a bypoll within six months from the date of the vacancy, chief election commissioner Rajiv Kumar had, soon after Wayanad vacancy was notified by the LS secretariat, ruled out any haste in conducting the bypoll.
At a press meet on March 29 to announce the Karnataka polls, the CEC, when asked why the Wayanad bypoll was not declared, had said, “We will wait. There is no hurry to do it (bypoll) before exhausting the particular remedy that the trial court had accorded”.
The EC ultimately chose not to schedule the bypoll until the final court of appeal had passed its order. Sources said the EC’s cautious approach was prompted by it having burnt its fingers with the Lakshadweep bypoll. It had announced bypoll to the island seat within days of the sitting MP’s disqualification. Even as the election process was on, the Kerala HC suspended his conviction and sentence. This had led the EC to withhold the Lakshadweep bypoll.