The Supreme Court Today (Nov 25) refused to examine a PIL seeking directions to the Election Commission and state election bodies to address the purported duplication and multiple entries in voter lists. A bench comprising CJI Sanjiv Khanna and Justice Sanjay Kumar said the apex court cannot issue omnibus directions to all authorities. The bench, however, allowed the petitioner Rashtrawadi Adarsh Mahasangh, a registered political outfit, to approach the high courts with specific grievances and permitted filing representations with appropriate authorities.
Thank you for reading this post, don't forget to subscribe!
NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court, on Monday, declined to entertain a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) seeking directives to the Election Commission of India (ECI) and state electoral bodies to tackle alleged duplication and multiple entries in voter lists.
The plea aimed to address what the petitioner described as a critical issue threatening the sanctity of Indian elections.
A bench comprising Chief Justice Sanjiv Khanna and Justice Sanjay Kumar observed that the apex court cannot issue broad, omnibus directions to all authorities involved.
However, the bench allowed the petitioner, Rashtrawadi Adarsh Mahasangh, a registered political organization, to approach high courts with specific grievances. The court also permitted the petitioner to file representations with the appropriate authorities for redress.
Duplicate Entries and Their Impact on Elections
The PIL underscored the “menace” of duplicate voter entries, asserting that such irregularities compromise the integrity of India’s democratic processes. It argued that these inaccuracies represent a direct threat to free and fair elections, which form the cornerstone of democracy.
“The present petitioner… wants to bring to the notice of this court the menace of duplication and multiplication of voter-ID cards and entries in voter lists and such cases are not one or a few but in thousands or perhaps in lakhs all over India, which is polluting, maligning and defiling the most sacred and celebrated festival of Indian democracy — ‘elections’…,”
-the PIL emphasized.
Legal Context and Petitioner’s Demand
The petitioner, represented by advocates Avadh Bihari Kaushik and Umseh Sharma, pointed to the 255th report of the Law Commission of India, which recommended a unified electoral roll.
The petition also referenced the 2021 amendment to the Representation of the People Act, which enabled linking Aadhaar with voter IDs to reduce duplication.
Despite these measures, the petitioner alleged, the issue persists due to poor implementation. The PIL argued that significant duplication in voter rolls persists across the country, warranting urgent corrective action.
The plea demanded:
- Deletion of duplicate voter entries within 30 days.
- Constitution of a Special Investigation Team (SIT), led by a retired Supreme Court judge, to oversee and ensure the rectification process.
Supreme Court’s Observations
While the Supreme Court refrained from direct intervention, it emphasized that targeted legal remedies remain accessible to address specific issues.
The bench encouraged the petitioner to take their concerns to the high courts, which are better positioned to handle localized electoral disputes.
Conclusion
The PIL reflects growing concerns over the accuracy and reliability of India’s electoral rolls. Although the Supreme Court opted not to issue generalized directives, its decision leaves room for legal action through high courts and representations to relevant authorities.
The outcome underscores the judiciary’s cautious approach in balancing systemic reforms with jurisdictional limitations, while reinforcing the importance of targeted interventions in addressing electoral grievances.
Click Here to Read Previous Reports on CJI Khanna
FOLLOW US ON YOUTUBE FOR MORE LEGAL UPDATES
