Under what rules did the ECI reject comedian Shyam Rangeela’s poll nomination from Varanasi? | Explained Premium

Why did the Election Commission of India reject comedian Shyam Rangeela’s poll nomination from Varanasi? What rules and judicial precedents are applicable here?

The story so far: The Election Commission of India (ECI) on May 15 rejected comedian Shyam Rangeela’s nomination from Uttar Pradesh’s Varanasi parliamentary constituency, stating that it was “incomplete.” Varanasi, from where Prime Minister Narendra Modi is seeking a third term, is scheduled to vote in the last phase of the Lok Sabha elections on June 1.

The 29-year-old stand-up comic from Rajasthan, who shot to fame for impersonating the Prime Minister, had submitted his nomination papers as an independent candidate. He had been alleging difficulties in submitting his nomination since May 10. After the rejection of his nomination, Mr. Rangeela in a video message on X alleged that citizens were being deprived of their right to contest polls and that while he did not hope to win, he wanted to send out a message.

Explaining why he decided to contest against PM Modi, Mr. Rangeela had earlier said, “We saw what happened in Surat and Chandigarh and what is currently happening in Indore. I do not want the same situation to occur in Varanasi. Even if one person wants to vote against a candidate, they have the right to do so. Hence, I decided to contest from Varanasi.”

Mr. Rangeela has claimed that the returning officer (RO) had accepted his nomination papers before 3 pm on May 14, which was the deadline for filing nominations for phase 7 of the Lok Sabha polls. However, on the next day, which was earmarked for the scrutiny of nominations filed in the constituency, the RO told him that his nomination was rejected since he had not been administered any oath — a crucial prerequisite for nomination.

According to Mr. Rangeela, he and other aspirants were not allowed to enter the District Magistrate’s office when they tried to file their nominations on May 13. Then on the next day, i.e. on May 14 — the day the Prime Minister was also slated to file his nomination, he claimed that he was not allowed to enter the office till the last minute. Finally, at 2.58 pm, 2 minutes before the deadline, his nomination paper was accepted. However, it was pointed out to him that a required document was missing, which he submitted later that day. He alleges that the RO did not tell him about any other requirement including that of an “oath and affirmation” till his nomination was rejected.

In a video message on X, Mr. Rangeela alleged that “the Election Commission has made elections in Varanasi a game.” Having submitted “all the required documents,” he questioned why they had accepted them in the first place, if the nomination wasn’t going to be approved.

According to the ECI’s Handbook for Candidate, 2023, the RO is supposed to conduct a ‘preliminary examination’ of the nomination papers to verify if all required affidavits have been filed to abate the chances of rejection. “In case any of the columns are left blank by the candidate, Returning Officer or the Specified Assistant Returning Officer will mention it in the checklist and hand it over to the candidate against proper receipt. In such cases the candidate will have opportunity to file a fresh affidavit complete in all respects by the time fixed for commencement of scrutiny,” it outlines.