The Supreme Court of India asked the Election Commission of India to consider suggestions made in a PIL to curb excessive election expenditure and improve its SOPs. While refusing to rely on third-party reports, the Court disposed of the PIL after directing the EC to examine and circulate the petitioner’s proposals internally.
New Delhi: The Supreme Court of India on Tuesday asked the Election Commission of India to treat a public interest litigation (PIL) as a formal representation and consider the suggestions made in it while framing or updating its standard operating procedures (SOPs) to control excessive election expenditure.
A Bench comprising Justice Surya Kant, Justice Joymalya Bagchi and Justice N V Anjaria observed that the Court cannot rely on third-party reports alleging excessive election spending, especially when such reports are disputed by the Election Commission itself.
However, the Bench made it clear that the ideas and recommendations suggested by the petitioner deserve serious consideration by the poll panel.
The Court noted that the petitioner, Prabhakar Deshpande, an IIT graduate and chemical engineer by profession, had approached the Court seeking directions to the Election Commission to frame a clear action plan against candidates who violate election spending limits. He had also urged the poll body to reconsider the existing cap on election expenses to protect the fairness and credibility of the democratic process.
While defending its present system, the Election Commission informed the Court that it already has strong monitoring mechanisms in place, including the appointment of independent expenditure observers and assistant expenditure observers.
These officers are usually drawn from the All India Services and other autonomous bodies, and are tasked with closely tracking election-related spending during campaigns.
At the same time, the Bench acknowledged that the petition was not filed with any personal motive but was raised in the broader public interest. It recorded that the concerns expressed by the petitioner regarding the real effectiveness of the existing mechanisms cannot be brushed aside lightly.
“We have no reason to doubt the plea has been filed in larger public interest. The plea seeks the Election Commission to formulate a detailed policy to curb excessive election expenditure. The plea cited a report detailing such expenditure. The EC has filed a counter inter alia questioning the authenticity of the report,”
the Bench noted in its order.
The Court further took note of the Election Commission’s submission that it appoints expenditure observers and assistant expenditure observers during elections.
“The EC has stated that such observers are members of All India Services or other autonomous bodies who are free from influence of contesting candidates,”
it added.
The Bench then clarified that it cannot place reliance on reports prepared by private bodies, including the Centre for Media Studies, when their findings are specifically disputed by the Election Commission.
“We have no basis to rely on the centre for media studies report when the EC has countered the same. However, suggestions by the petitioner can be looked at by the Election Commission to cur electoral malpractices. We dispose of the plea with direction to the Election Commission to circulate the suggestions of the petitioner among its committee. If the committee finds an suggestion worthy of reliance then they may include the same in their SOP”
the Bench said.
The Court also allowed the petitioner to submit additional suggestions to the Election Commission in the future, if he feels that further measures are required to strengthen checks on election expenditure and prevent misuse of money power in elections.
With these directions, the Supreme Court disposed of the PIL, leaving it to the Election Commission to internally examine and, if found appropriate, implement the suggestions as part of its standard operating procedures.
Click Here to Read More Reports On Excessive Poll
