Delhi High Court Refuses To Entertain PIL Against 'Unchecked Political Expenditure'; Asks Litigant To Approach Centre

The Delhi High Court on Wednesday (September 10) refused to entertain a PIL highlighting the issue of unchecked and excessive political expenditure, misuse of government machinery during elections, lack of voter awareness and need for electoral reforms.

A division bench comprising Chief Justice DK Upadhyaya and Justice Tushar Rao Gedela closed the plea filed by Aakash Goel, an independent candidate in the Delhi Legislative Elections 2025, from Wazirpur constituency.

While the Court declined to interfere, it permitted Goel to make a representation to the competent authority in the Government of India for redressal of his grievances.

The Court said that the authority may consider the representation and disposed of the PIL.

The Bench observed that except for one of the prayers challenging the vires of Section 38(2) and 38(3) of Representation of the People Act, 1951, all other prayers were in the realm of policy making.

Regarding the challenge to the vires, the Court noted that the Telangana High Court in Parikshit Reddy v. Union of India last year had upheld the validity of the provisions in question. The Bench said that it was in agreement with the ruling.

Goel also sought a direction on ECI to fix spending limit on the expenditure undertaken by the political parties, to implement Model Code of Conduct at least two months in advance before voting day, ensure effective circulation of information relating to the candidates and to provide the expenditure details along with candidates affidavits.

The Court refused to entertain the other prayers, observing that they were exclusively in domain of policy making and that the proposal for electoral reforms is already pending before the Government of India, as suggested by ECI.

Goel received 234 votes in the polls. He had spent Rs 1,44,890 on election campaign, almost all on pamphlet printing.

It was his case that while there is a spending limit applicable to the candidates, there is no cap on the expenditure done by the political parties, which in effect enables them to circumvent the expenditure limit otherwise applicable on the candidates putting them at an advantageous position as against other candidates.

He further said that despite repeated mandates of disclosing the criminal records, assets details and qualification of the candidate, very few voters are able to access or review this information before voting.

“The current grouping of the candidates on the ballot paper or EVM gives unfair advantage to the candidates contesting from a recognised political party, which are placed at first followed by candidates from the unrecognised parties and lastly, the names of the independent candidates are listed. There by putting independent candidates at a disadvantageous position,” the plea stated.

Title: Aakash Goel v. Election Commission of India & Ors

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1081