<p>The Supreme Court (SC) on Friday gave the Centre the final opportunity to file its reply to a PIL for debarring those persons facing trial for serious offences from contesting polls, while saying it is an important matter as a common man is affected by corruption.</p>.<p>Taking up the plea by advocate Ashwini Kumar Upadhyay, a bench of Justices K M Joseph and B V Nagarathna said, there must be accountability at all levels.</p>.<p>The Centre said it would file its response in the matter, though the issue has been covered in previous judgements. The Election Commission of India (ECI), for its part, said we have raised our concern about the criminalisation of politics. The issue fell under the domain of Parliament.</p>.<p>Appearing in person, Upadhyay said, "Today, we are in a situation where a peon without any decent education can become ministers. We are celebrating 75 years of independence, but a person with kidnapping and extortion charges can get elected in polls."</p>.<p>"If we have to truly become a nation we strive to, we have to come back to our values. A common man is bogged down by corruption. Go to any govt office, can you come out unscathed? Jurist Nani Palkhiwala lecture on 'We the people' speaks about this," the bench said.</p>.<p>On this, Upadhyay said, "That is why I filed a PIL to link property with Aadhaar and that is how corruption can be weeded out. We in India don't need Rs 500 or Rs 2,000 notes as most people have credit card, and debit card. There needs to be notebandi (note ban) and not notebadli (not exchange)."</p>.<p>The bench then said, "You have to get back to your values and how you live your life. If you have that you will have your nation. We need nation-building teachers. We also have to become humble".</p>.<p>Following the brief hearing, the bench fixed the matter for a final hearing on April 10, 2023.</p>.<p>The apex court had on September 28, 2022, issued notice to the Union government's Law and Justice and Home Ministries, and the Election Commission on the PIL to debar all those persons, against whom charges have been framed, from contesting the election in accordance with the recommendations of the Law Commission's 244 th report.</p>.<p>A court frame charges against an accused after taking a prima facie view of the charge sheet filed in a case. With this, a formal trial is started by allowing deposition by witnesses.</p>.<p>The petitioner sought a direction to the EC to use its plenary power conferred under Article 324, to amend the Election Symbols (Reservation and Allotment) Order 1968, to insert such a restriction for the contestants.</p>.<p>The petitioner raised concern about the increase in the number of candidates who declared criminal cases against them. Out of 539 winners of the 17th Lok Sabha, 233 (43 per cent) declared criminal cases against themselves. After the 2014 Lok Sabha elections, 185 (34 per cent) winners had declared criminal cases.</p>.<p>The Law Commission, in its 244th report favoured debarring candidates with criminal antecedents with an additional condition that charges should have been framed at least one year before the scrutiny of nominations.</p>
<p>The Supreme Court (SC) on Friday gave the Centre the final opportunity to file its reply to a PIL for debarring those persons facing trial for serious offences from contesting polls, while saying it is an important matter as a common man is affected by corruption.</p>.<p>Taking up the plea by advocate Ashwini Kumar Upadhyay, a bench of Justices K M Joseph and B V Nagarathna said, there must be accountability at all levels.</p>.<p>The Centre said it would file its response in the matter, though the issue has been covered in previous judgements. The Election Commission of India (ECI), for its part, said we have raised our concern about the criminalisation of politics. The issue fell under the domain of Parliament.</p>.<p>Appearing in person, Upadhyay said, "Today, we are in a situation where a peon without any decent education can become ministers. We are celebrating 75 years of independence, but a person with kidnapping and extortion charges can get elected in polls."</p>.<p>"If we have to truly become a nation we strive to, we have to come back to our values. A common man is bogged down by corruption. Go to any govt office, can you come out unscathed? Jurist Nani Palkhiwala lecture on 'We the people' speaks about this," the bench said.</p>.<p>On this, Upadhyay said, "That is why I filed a PIL to link property with Aadhaar and that is how corruption can be weeded out. We in India don't need Rs 500 or Rs 2,000 notes as most people have credit card, and debit card. There needs to be notebandi (note ban) and not notebadli (not exchange)."</p>.<p>The bench then said, "You have to get back to your values and how you live your life. If you have that you will have your nation. We need nation-building teachers. We also have to become humble".</p>.<p>Following the brief hearing, the bench fixed the matter for a final hearing on April 10, 2023.</p>.<p>The apex court had on September 28, 2022, issued notice to the Union government's Law and Justice and Home Ministries, and the Election Commission on the PIL to debar all those persons, against whom charges have been framed, from contesting the election in accordance with the recommendations of the Law Commission's 244 th report.</p>.<p>A court frame charges against an accused after taking a prima facie view of the charge sheet filed in a case. With this, a formal trial is started by allowing deposition by witnesses.</p>.<p>The petitioner sought a direction to the EC to use its plenary power conferred under Article 324, to amend the Election Symbols (Reservation and Allotment) Order 1968, to insert such a restriction for the contestants.</p>.<p>The petitioner raised concern about the increase in the number of candidates who declared criminal cases against them. Out of 539 winners of the 17th Lok Sabha, 233 (43 per cent) declared criminal cases against themselves. After the 2014 Lok Sabha elections, 185 (34 per cent) winners had declared criminal cases.</p>.<p>The Law Commission, in its 244th report favoured debarring candidates with criminal antecedents with an additional condition that charges should have been framed at least one year before the scrutiny of nominations.</p>