The petitioners argue that the recent amendments to the 1961 rules were done “very cleverly” to block access to CCTV footage from polling stations, which the government claims could reveal a voter’s identity.
New Delhi, April 17 – The Supreme Court has given the Election Commission (EC) three more weeks to reply to petitions filed by Congress leader Jairam Ramesh and others.
These petitions challenge the recent changes made to the Conduct of Election Rules, 1961, which reportedly limit public access to key election-related documents like CCTV and webcasting footage.
A bench led by Chief Justice Sanjiv Khanna and Justice Sanjay Kumar had earlier issued notices to the Centre and the Election Commission on January 15, asking them to respond to the petition filed by Jairam Ramesh.
On Thursday, senior advocate Maninder Singh, representing the Election Commission, requested the court for additional time to file the reply. The bench accepted the request and allowed three more weeks, scheduling the hearing for the week beginning July 21.
Besides Jairam Ramesh’s petition, two similar Public Interest Litigations (PILs) have also been filed—one by Shyam Lal Pal and the other by RTI activist Anjali Bhardwaj. Senior lawyers Kapil Sibal and Abhishek Manu Singhvi appeared on behalf of Ramesh.
The petitioners argue that the recent amendments to the 1961 rules were done “very cleverly” to block access to CCTV footage from polling stations, which the government claims could reveal a voter’s identity.
However, senior advocate Abhishek Singhvi had earlier told the court that the footage “never reveals” any person’s voting choice and cannot be used to identify whom someone voted for. He urged the court to make the Election Commission and the Centre file their responses before the next hearing.
ALSO READ: Kapil Sibal Criticizes Election Commission, Calls It a “Sham” if System Continues
Jairam Ramesh, in his plea filed in December, expressed concern over the declining integrity of the electoral system.
He stated: “The integrity of the electoral process is fast eroding. Hopefully the Supreme Court will help restore it.”
The government recently made changes to the Conduct of Election Rules based on a recommendation from the Election Commission. Specifically, the Union Law Ministry in December amended Rule 93(2)(a) to limit public access to certain types of election-related documents, such as CCTV recordings, webcasts, and video footage of candidates, citing the possibility of misuse.
Previously, Rule 93(2)(a) allowed “all other papers relating to the election shall be open to public inspection.”
However, the amended rule now says that only “all other papers as specified in these rules relating to the election shall be open to public inspection.”
Anjali Bhardwaj, in her petition filed through lawyer Prashant Bhushan, challenged this amendment and argued that it goes against the citizens’ rights under the Constitution.
Her petition claims that the new amendment violates Articles 14, 19(1)(a), and 21 of the Constitution.
It said the rule “brings opaqueness and restricts people’s fundamental right to access vital documents and papers related to elections.”
The plea added that this reduces transparency and may encourage corruption by preventing public scrutiny.
It further argued that the amendment “imposed arbitrary constraints by restricting access to only those records explicitly mentioned in the rules, excluding others without justification.”
The plea also said that this change is “contrary to the spirit of the RTI Act, which promotes governmental accountability and transparency.”
The petitioners maintain that such restrictions on public access to crucial election materials—especially when it involves something as significant as CCTV or video footage—could affect the fairness and transparency of the democratic process. They urge the Supreme Court to strike down the amendment and restore broader public access to electoral records.
