NEW DELHI: Opposing the Supreme Court’s view that a candidate facing trial in a heinous crime should be deprived of the political party’s election symbol , the Centre on Tuesday said it would violate the golden principle ‘innocent till found guilty’ that governs the criminal justice system.

Attorney general K K Venugopal told a constitution bench of Chief Justice Dipak Misra and Justices R F Nariman, A M Khanwilkar, D Y Chandrachud and Indu Malhotra that the apex court should not pre-judge the guilt of a candidate merely because she faced trial in a criminal offence.

“By adopting the method to deprive a candidate facing trial of the symbol of his political party at election, the SC would be proceeding as if there is a taint on him/her. The SC cannot get away from the fact that the criminal justice system scrupulously adheres to the principle of ‘innocent till pronounced guilty’.

The trial process entails a long procedure and gives every opportunity to the accused or those falsely implicated to prove his/her innocence,” Venugopal said.

“The intention of the Supreme Court to curb criminalisation of politics is laudable. But is this a matter for the SC or the legislature, especially when the consequences are grave and serious for the political parties,” he added. Justice Nariman was quick to respond, “We are not going to legislate a disqualification for a candidate. But consequences of not doing anything (to curb criminalisation of politics) is still worse.”

The AG said, “False charges have ruined several careers. The government will look into this issue (criminalisation of politics) as a matter of public policy. But the SC should also look into the statistics.

In criminal cases, there is only 26% conviction. This means an overwhelming 74% of the accused are acquitted.

The SC must accept that not only are those facing trial innocent but also that those who are acquitted are innocent for all times. Can this overwhelming majority be deprived of the party’s election symbol during the trial process?” Justice Malhotra saw merit in the AG’s submission and said it had become a trend to implicate persons in false cases. The bench reserved its verdict and asked the parties to file their written submissions by September 4.

