Latest news with #RepresentationofthePeopleAct1951
Hindustan Times
3 days ago
- Politics
- Hindustan Times
In Bihar SIR case, Supreme Court has to walk a tightrope
The Supreme Court is hearing several petitions against the Election Commission of India (ECI)'s decision to conduct a special intensive revision (SIR) of the electoral rolls in Bihar even as the first phase of the exercise was completed last week. SIR targets updating the rolls before the upcoming Assembly elections in the state. After the first phase, ECI revealed that 72.4 million enumeration forms have been collected, which is 6.5 million less than the number of registered voters in the state as on June 24, when SIR began. While ECI has the power to conduct revision of electoral rolls under Section 21 of the Representation of the People Act 1950, two striking issues aggrieved the petitioners. First, the revision process required all voters who had been enrolled after 2003 to re-enroll and demonstrate their eligibility, and second, they were allowed only one month to do so. Despite serious claims of mass disenfranchisement due to the opaque procedure, the swift manner of enumeration, and a short time limit to re-enroll, the Court refused to stay the exercise. It merely asked ECI to 'consider' three other documents, namely the Aadhaar card, the ration card, and the voter ID card, to tackle the possibility of disenfranchisement. Several judgments have highlighted the importance of the right to vote and how it goes to the heart of democracy in India. However, the right to vote continues to remain a statutory right. Its existence is tied to a specific legislation — alarmingly, one that can be interfered with or subjected to conditions. Section 62 of Representation of the People Act 1951 states that the right to vote is to be provided only to those people whose names are present in the electoral rolls of a constituency. Thus, the process of preparation and revision of electoral rolls is an important step in identifying eligible voters. In Baidyanath Panjiar v. Sitaram Mahto (1969), the Supreme Court disallowed any revisions to the rolls in Bihar since the deadline had expired. The 1960 Rules prevent any amendment, transposition, inclusion, or deletion of voters after the last date. Such precedents and rules do not inspire the expectation of an outcome in favour of the petitioners in the current case, given the apex court's refusal to stay the exercise, though there is still some time to the deadline. Also, there are risks of a potential dismissal of the SIR case for two reasons: First, the Supreme Court has limited grounds to review such cases, and second, the Supreme Court is always sceptical about delaying elections in such cases. The 1950 Act provides for an internal review mechanism for complaints or grievances — any person can file objections to the electoral officers, raise complaints, and ask for further directions from ECI. There exists a repeated emphasis on following this process before approaching the courts. In Uttar Pradesh, in the case of Anugrah Narain Singh v. State of UP (1996), the Supreme Court refused to intervene in irregularities regarding the preparation and correction of electoral rolls and deferred to the internal process. In the same vein, it is highly probable that the Court, while evaluating the legality of Bihar's revision process, may simply redirect the complainants to these statutory processes. The nature and efficiency of this mechanism have never been questioned. Whether ECI can be independent in assessing complaints made against its officers remains to be seen. That apart, the process may not be transparent or citizen-centric. Past cases have highlighted deep-rooted issues with these internal redressal mechanisms. Several people have complained that their objections went unheard due to the officers being unwelcoming of their concerns. Further, this process has been quite exclusionary to certain groups of vulnerable citizens, such as slum dwellers. Such processes severely affect those at the margins. Would the uneducated be able to understand the voter disqualification notices? Would the daily-wage worker be able to forego one day's worth of work to appear before the electoral officer? In Lal Babu Hussein v. Electoral Registration Officer (1995), poor, uneducated residents of Paharganj had questioned the inaccessibility of such redressal processes and highlighted the unfair and unreasonable procedures they had to go through. In the end, only the Court was able to uphold their rights through due process. Thus, it is strongly in the interests of justice that the Supreme Court substantively adjudicates in the current Bihar SIR case. This could ensure any instance of possible disenfranchisement in Bihar does not go unsupervised, unchecked, or uncontrolled. The second reason that the courts hesitate to intervene is the fear of delaying the elections. In Lakshmi Chandra Sen v. AKM Hassan (1985), the Supreme Court was apprehensive about ordering a revision of electoral rolls. It was worried about unwarranted judicial control over elections or worse, an indefinite postponement. The unsaid principle goes: The more imminent the election, the greater the reluctance to judicially interfere. The only exception made is if there exist irregularities in the process, which have the potential to vitiate the entire election. Then, a special tribunal may be set up to address the same. Hence, in the Bihar case, first, there exists the possibility of the Supreme Court summarily refusing to intervene, citing interference with the assembly elections. Second, even if the Court thought that the revision of rolls was irregular, there exists the possibility of it neither injuncting the election process nor preventing disenfranchisement. In most matters, the Supreme Court has always assumed the role of the sentinel on the qui vive (on the alert) for any harm — however small — to Indian democracy. It is even more important that the Court should take up this mantle and protect the literal basis of democracy — the people's right to vote — now. Anshul Dalmia is with Vidhi Centre for Legal Policy. The views expressed are personal.
Time of India
7 days ago
- Politics
- Time of India
He chose to threaten constitutional body: EC on Rahul Gandhi's Karnataka claims
New Delhi: The Election Commission on Thursday hit out at Congress leader Rahul Gandhi 's claim that it allowed cheating in a Karnataka constituency and said that besides making "baseless allegations", the leader of opposition in the Lok Sabha chose to "threaten" a constitutional body. Gandhi said the Congress has "concrete 100 per cent proof" that the Election Commission (EC) allowed cheating in a constituency in Karnataka and warned the poll panel that it will not get away with this "because we are going to come for you". Explore courses from Top Institutes in Please select course: Select a Course Category Project Management CXO MBA Technology Data Science others Design Thinking PGDM Leadership Product Management Others Public Policy Data Analytics MCA Digital Marketing Degree Cybersecurity Operations Management Healthcare Data Science healthcare Finance Artificial Intelligence Management Skills you'll gain: Project Planning & Governance Agile Software Development Practices Project Management Tools & Software Techniques Scrum Framework Duration: 12 Weeks Indian School of Business Certificate Programme in IT Project Management Starts on Jun 20, 2024 Get Details Responding to Gandhi's statement, the EC said that as far as the Karnataka elections are concerned, it is "highly unfortunate" that rather than filling an election petition as per Section 80 of the Representation of the People Act 1951, or if filed, awaiting the verdict of the high court, he not only made "baseless allegations" but has also "chosen to threaten" the EC, a constitutional body. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like Villas For Sale in Dubai Might Surprise You Dubai villas | search ads Get Deals Undo Gandhi alleged that the EC is not functioning as the Election Commission of India , and is "not doing its job". Asked about the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls in Bihar and RJD leader Tejashwi Yadav 's reported remarks that the option of boycotting the Bihar assembly polls was open, Gandhi told reporters in the Parliament House premises that his party has "concrete 100 per cent proof" of the EC allowing cheating in a seat in Karnataka. Live Events "Not 90 per cent, when we decide to show it to you, it is a 100 per cent proof," the former Congress president said. "We just looked at one constituency and we found this. I am absolutely convinced that constituency after constituency this is the drama that is taking place ... I want to send a message to the Election Commission -- if you think you are going to get away with this, if your officers think they are going to get away with this, you are mistaken. You are not going to get away with this because we are going to come for you," Gandhi said.
&w=3840&q=100)
Business Standard
7 days ago
- Politics
- Business Standard
He chose to threaten a constitutional body: EC on Rahul's Karnataka claims
The Election Commission on Thursday hit out at Congress leader Rahul Gandhi's claim that it allowed cheating in a Karnataka constituency and said that besides making "baseless allegations", the leader of opposition in the Lok Sabha chose to "threaten" a constitutional body. Gandhi said the Congress has "concrete 100 per cent proof" that the Election Commission (EC) allowed cheating in a constituency in Karnataka and warned the poll panel that it will not get away with this "because we are going to come for you". Responding to Gandhi's statement, the EC said that as far as the Karnataka elections are concerned, it is "highly unfortunate" that rather than filling an election petition as per Section 80 of the Representation of the People Act 1951, or if filed, awaiting the verdict of the high court, he not only made "baseless allegations" but has also "chosen to threaten" the EC, a constitutional body. Gandhi alleged that the EC is not functioning as the Election Commission of India, and is "not doing its job". Asked about the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls in Bihar and RJD leader Tejashwi Yadav's reported remarks that the option of boycotting the Bihar assembly polls was open, Gandhi told reporters in the Parliament House premises that his party has "concrete 100 per cent proof" of the EC allowing cheating in a seat in Karnataka. "Not 90 per cent, when we decide to show it to you, it is a 100 per cent proof," the former Congress president said. "We just looked at one constituency and we found this. I am absolutely convinced that constituency after constituency this is the drama that is taking place ... I want to send a message to the Election Commission -- if you think you are going to get away with this, if your officers think they are going to get away with this, you are mistaken. You are not going to get away with this because we are going to come for you," Gandhi said. (Only the headline and picture of this report may have been reworked by the Business Standard staff; the rest of the content is auto-generated from a syndicated feed.)
News18
7 days ago
- Politics
- News18
He chose to threaten constitutional body: EC on Rahul's Karnataka claims
Agency: Last Updated: July 24, 2025, 19:15 IST Representational image (Image: News18) New Delhi, Jul 24 (PTI) The Election Commission on Thursday hit out at Congress leader Rahul Gandhi's claim that it allowed cheating in a Karnataka constituency and said that besides making 'baseless allegations", the leader of opposition in the Lok Sabha chose to 'threaten" a constitutional body. Gandhi said the Congress has 'concrete 100 per cent proof" that the Election Commission (EC) allowed cheating in a constituency in Karnataka and warned the poll panel that it will not get away with this 'because we are going to come for you". Responding to Gandhi's statement, the EC said that as far as the Karnataka elections are concerned, it is 'highly unfortunate" that rather than filling an election petition as per Section 80 of the Representation of the People Act 1951, or if filed, awaiting the verdict of the high court, he not only made 'baseless allegations" but has also 'chosen to threaten" the EC, a constitutional body. Gandhi alleged that the EC is not functioning as the Election Commission of India, and is 'not doing its job". Asked about the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls in Bihar and RJD leader Tejashwi Yadav's reported remarks that the option of boycotting the Bihar assembly polls was open, Gandhi told reporters in the Parliament House premises that his party has 'concrete 100 per cent proof" of the EC allowing cheating in a seat in Karnataka. Swipe Left For Next Video View all 'Not 90 per cent, when we decide to show it to you, it is a 100 per cent proof," the former Congress president said. 'We just looked at one constituency and we found this. I am absolutely convinced that constituency after constituency this is the drama that is taking place … I want to send a message to the Election Commission — if you think you are going to get away with this, if your officers think they are going to get away with this, you are mistaken. You are not going to get away with this because we are going to come for you," Gandhi said. PTI NAB DIV DIV (This story has not been edited by News18 staff and is published from a syndicated news agency feed - PTI) view comments News agency-feeds He chose to threaten constitutional body: EC on Rahuls Karnataka claims Disclaimer: Comments reflect users' views, not News18's. Please keep discussions respectful and constructive. Abusive, defamatory, or illegal comments will be removed. News18 may disable any comment at its discretion. By posting, you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.
Time of India
27-06-2025
- Politics
- Time of India
EC crackdown: 345 unrecognised parties face delisting; failed to contest polls or verify office locations
NEW DELHI: In a move aimed at 'cleaning the political space', the Election Commission on Thursday initiated proceedings for delisting 345 regisered unrecognised political parties (RUPPs) that had failed to fulfil the statutory obligation of contesting even a single election in the last six years and the offices of which could not be located at the address mentioned in their registration documents. These 345 RUPPs are registered in different states and Union territories across the country. The Commission on Thursday said that it had come to its notice that of the over 2,800 RUPPs currently registered with ECI, many have failed to fulfil the essential conditions to maintain their registration status. 'Thus, a nationwide exercise was conducted by the ECI to identify such RUPPs and 345 such RUPPs have been identified till now,' EC said in a statement. The review is ongoing and more such 'non-compliant, inactive' RUPPs may face delisting proceedings in the days to come. The chief electoral officers (CEOs) of the states/UTs where such 'defaulter' RUPPs are registered, have been directed to issue show-cause notices, giving an opportunity to such parties to be heard. 'The final decision regarding the delisting of any RUPP shall be taken by the Election Commission of India , based on the CEO's report,' said an official. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like Giao dịch vàng CFDs với sàn môi giới tin cậy IC Markets Tìm hiểu thêm Undo Political parties (National/State/RUPPs) in the country are registered with the ECI under the provisions of Section 29A of the Representation of the People Act 1951. Under this provision, any association, once registered as a political party, gets certain privileges and advantages such as tax exemptions amongst others. EC had in January 2024 made it mandatory for RUPPs to attach a declaration with their application for allotment of common poll symbol, confirming that they have filed their contribution reports and annual audit accounts for the last three financial years and election expenditure statement for the last two polls contested. Since 2022, the poll panel has delisted 284 defaulting and non-compliant RUPPs and declared 253 RUPPs inactive as part of its efforts to clean up the political space historically occupied by non-functional political parties. These parties were found to be availing benefits like 100% tax exemption on donations received without meeting the statutory requirements under the Representation of the People Act or contesting elections. Some were serving as shell companies or money laundering vehicles, while some others were fielding candidates in elections only to demand money from recognised parties for withdrawing their nomination.
