Supreme court to look into legality of NOTA for voters in uncontested polls
The petition had sought a declaration that the NOTA option should be available to voters in case there is only one contesting candidate for an election. The petition has argued that after the introduction of the NOTA option in polls since 2013, the 'Right to vote' of the electorate was being violated in situations where only one candidate contested the election.The petitioners also submitted that while there was a sharp decline in uncontested seats in the Lok Sabha elections after 1989, there are several instances in State assembly elections when a candidate is elected unopposed. The figure is even higher at the level of Panchayat/Local body elections. During the brief hearing on Thursday, the bench noted that the averments by the petitioners seem to seek 'an extension of the NOTA principle.''If there is only one candidate and people still go and vote NOTA, then it shows there is so much resentment against the candidate,' suggested Justice Suryakant.The government and the ECI, however, vehemently opposed the petition.Attorney General R Venkataramani, during the hearing, informed the bench that, due to rare situations where an election is uncontested, 'this is an academic exercise.' The Attorney General also submitted that the court would have to 'see how far NOTA can be stretched.'Senior advocate Rakesh Dwivedi, for the ECI, also argued that "if people are so unhappy with the candidate, they can field their own candidate." Dwivedi also submitted that Advocate Harsh Parasher, appearing for Vidhi Legal however, said that the matter affected the people's right to choose their representative.'This has happened in Vidhan Sabhas more than 290 times in the last few years. In Arunachal Pradesh, in the 2024 polls, 6 seats were uncontested,' said Parashar. The counsel also submitted that the rules should allow countermanding an election if the NOTA votes are polled in an "uncontested" election. "What will happen then?" asked Parasher.advertisementThe bench then observed that if the NOTA is accepted and an election is countermanded, it is likely that political parties would field different candidates in the bypoll."I think all parties will field candidates. In India, we also have independent candidates. It's rare to have an uncontested election. That's why the AG says it's an academic exercise," noted Justice Suryakant.Advocate Prashant Bhushan, appearing for ADR, also pointed out that some states have brought in rules for Local Body elections that if NOTA votes are more than votes for a winning candidate, then the election is countermanded and a fresh election can be held. The ECI counsel, however, argued that the local body polls, held under the state rules, are legally different from the State Assembly and Lok Sabha polls that are held under the RP Act and ECI rules.The hearing has for now been adjourned to November 6 as the affidavit filed by the central government on Thursday was not available on the court record at the time of the hearing.The Centre and the ECI, in their affidavits, have opposed the plea, submitting that Section 53 of the RP Act and Rule 11 of the Conduct of Elections Rules specifically lay down the process for an 'Uncontested Election.'advertisementIn its affidavit filed on Thursday, the central government argued that 'there is a difference between the 'Right to Vote' and the 'Freedom of Voting' under the Constitution,' which has been recognised by the Supreme Court.The Government has further argued that NOTA cannot be included as a 'candidate' in the election, as the law clearly defines the procedure depending on the number of candidates in the election. According to the Center's affidavit, 'NOTA is merely an opinion or expression,' and therefore cannot be substituted as a 'candidate' as per the procedure prescribed under Section 53(2).- EndsTune InMust Watch
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Indian Express
20 minutes ago
- Indian Express
‘Investigation in the train blast case is a sad comment on how little policing has changed since 1872'
There were two recent judgments in terror cases–the 2006 Mumbai train blasts and the 2008 Malegaon blasts judgments. The high court verdict acquitting 12 people for the train blasts (7/11) called the torture meted out to them as 'barbaric' and 'inhuman'–the use of the judgment as a precedent in cases of MCOCA was stayed by the Supreme Court while not interfering with the high court's findings on the men's innocence. The trial court in the Malegaon case said there was a strong suspicion, but no legal proof against the seven accused it acquitted, citing reasons including the lack of procedure followed by the prosecution. Sadaf Modak speaks with advocates Yug Chaudhry and Payoshi Roy, who represented the accused in the train blasts case, about procedures and safeguards in terror probes. While drafting the Indian Evidence Act, James Fitzjames Stephen had decreed confessions to police officers as inadmissible. This holds equally true today and even the new criminal laws bar the use of confessions and witness statements made before police officers. The investigation in the train blast case is a sad comment on how little policing has changed since 1872, despite the upgrade in resources and technique. In this case, torture was the investigative tool of choice whether it be by obtaining false confessions, or coerced signatures on make-believe recovery /seizure panchnamas concocted in the police station. Superior officers endorsed the use of torture, and often threatened the prisoners with it if they did not cooperate or if they complained to the judges. Remand judges and later the trial judge pretended that there were no signs of torture even when it was staring them in the face. It appears that investigating officers resorting to such fabrication are enabled by the judicial latitude they are assured of receiving in terror cases. The failure therefore is not one of technique or manner of probe but a crisis of impunity. The burden lies not only on courts but also on the State to strictly monitor these investigations and pull up erring officers. This is a case where the High Court has found that the police have tortured the accused to procure confessions and destroyed evidence of CDR that would exonerate the accused. Instead of immediately instituting a wide-ranging review of this botched investigation, the state has denied its falsity. This attitude is a disservice to the victims who deserve an honest investigation, like the high court itself observed, that there is no greater betrayal of victims of terror crimes than fabricated investigations. This judgment should serve as a clarion call to the political leadership that short-cuts in terror investigations are unacceptable. At present, sanction and prior approval for MCOCA (Maharashtra Control of Organised Crime Act) prosecution are given by an officer of the DIG Rank. When a terror offence of this magnitude is committed, officers at the highest level supervise the investigation. Seeking sanction from the DIG or the DGP of the state, who has been actively monitoring the investigation, is like an appeal from Ceaser to Ceaser's wife. In the 7/11 case, the approval for Act was granted without looking at the chargesheets, which allows DCPs to record confessions. One of the reasons the high court rejected the confessions is because prior approval was given without application of mind. Even under UAPA, sanction is sought from an authority appointed by the Central or state government. These safeguards have been reduced to a nullity. The authority granting sanction must be independent and quasi-judicial and must be able to scrutinise the material independently. Section 195 of the Indian Penal Code and now Section 230 of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita penalises giving of false evidence and fabricating evidence with the intent to procure a conviction in a capital case. It is punishable with life imprisonment. It is time this law is implemented. Responsible police officers of the highest to the lowest rank must be prosecuted under the law. Police officers cannot be prosecuted for failing to collect sufficient evidence or if a prosecution fails to prove the accused's guilt beyond reasonable doubt. However, in a case such as the 7/11 blasts where officers have lied on oath about recording contemporaneous confessions, where there is stark evidence of brutal torture, where officers have deliberately destroyed the accused's CDR despite repeated applications by the defence for the CDR knowing that would exonerate the accused–such criminal action from the custodians of the law must be prosecuted under the law. If this is not done, there will be no acknowledgement by the State that they have failed the victims, failed society and undermined national security.
The Hindu
20 minutes ago
- The Hindu
CPI(M), Congress to highlight ‘voter fraud' in Thrissur LS polls in campaign against BJP
The ruling front and the Opposition in the State seem set to spotlight alleged voter fraud in the 2024 Thrissur Lok Sabha elections in their campaigning against the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) ahead of the local body elections later in the year. The possibility of electoral malpractices is arguably gaining political traction in Kerala after Leader of the Opposition in the Lok Sabha Rahul Gandhi accused the Election Commission of India (ECI) of colluding with the BJP to add over a lakh phoney voters to the electoral list in at least one Assembly segment in a Lok Sabha constituency in Karnataka ahead of the 2024 general elections. Communist Party of India (Marxist) [CPI(M)] general secretary M.A. Baby told reporters in Thrissur that the contours of the electoral fraud in Karnataka appeared evident in the Thrissur constituency too. He alleged that the ECI helped BJP booth agents add at least 30,000 bogus voters in Thrissur using fudged proof of domicile and forged identities. Charges against ECI Mr. Baby said the ECI had called a meeting of election officials from the Booth Level Officer (BLO) and upwards ahead of the 2024 polls to dilute the voter enrolment process. The ECI had authorised BLOs to add to the voters' list any person who has completed two days of residence in their jurisdiction, if the individual provided the slightest proof of domicile. Earlier, he said, a new voter qualified for the electoral list only if the person provided solid evidence of residence for at least six months. 'Guest workers, passers-by, and people outside the constituency found their way into the electoral list with the ctive collusion of ECI officials and BJP agents who provided them phoney identity proof and addresses of empty houses and apartments in Thrissur,' Mr. Baby said. District Congress Committee president Joseph Taget alleged that the ECI glossed over anomalies on the voters' list flagged by party workers. UDF leader N.K. Premachandran, MP, said the INDIA bloc allies would weigh impeaching the members of the constitutional body. BJP response M.T. Ramesh, BJP's core committee member, rubbished the CPI(M)-Congress claims. He said Mr. Gopi won by over 75,000 votes. He said the surprising victory stung both parties and signalled the end of UDF-LDF 'revolving door' politics in Kerala. 'The CPI(M) and Congress had no complaints about the electoral list during the voter enrolment phase,' he said.
News18
an hour ago
- News18
Over 80 publicly flogged in Afghanistan in past month amid human rights concerns
Kabul [Afghanistan], August 10 (ANI): More than 80 men and women have been subjected to public floggings across Afghanistan over the past month, raising alarm among human rights groups about ongoing abuses and a lack of judicial transparency under Taliban rule, Khamma Press to Khamma Press, citing a weekly report released on Saturday by the Taliban's Supreme Court, 31 individuals were publicly flogged in the last week alone in several provinces, including Maidan Wardak, Kabul, Zabul, Kapisa, Baghlan, and court did not reveal the identities or specific charges of those punished, though other official statements confirmed that 14 people, including one woman, were flogged in Kabul and Zabul for alleged crimes such as alcohol sales, trafficking narcotic pills, and engaging in extramarital court also reported that 10 people in Kabul and Maidan Wardak were punished for alleged theft and drug-related offences. In contrast, eight others in Kabul and Kapisa faced similar punishments for drug trafficking, Khamma Press total, Taliban officials say 81 individuals have been publicly flogged in recent weeks, with punishments frequently carried out in front of gathered crowds, despite repeated international condemnation and calls to end corporal punishment, which many human rights organisations regard as a form of Rights defenders argue that these floggings highlight the Taliban's continued disregard for fair trial procedures and legal standards, exacerbating concerns over the country's worsening human rights landscape, Khamma Press warn that such practices are further eroding any prospects for judicial reform in Afghanistan and deepening the Taliban's isolation from the global practice of public flogging is not new to the Taliban regime, as this is not the first time they have implemented such punishments. The practice was prominent when the militant group was in power in the country before the US and Allied forces invaded it and established a new government backed by the US and allied powers in since their withdrawal from the country back in August 2021, the Taliban again took over Afghanistan, regaining control. (ANI)
