MP of the Jairam Ramesh Door Congress The winter session of Parliament, in New Delhi, Wednesday, December 18, 2024. | Photo credit: PTI
The Supreme Court on Thursday (April 17, 2025) granted three more weeks to the Electoral Commission to respond to the supplications of the Secretary General of the Jairam Ramesh Congress and others against the recent amendments to the 1961 elections rules.
A bank that includes the president of the Supreme Court Sanjiv Khanna and Judge Sanjay Kumar had issued a notice to the center and the voting panel on January 15 about Mr. Ramesh’s plea and requested an answer.
The senior lawyer Manner Singh, which appears for the voting panel, looked for three more weeks to present the answer.
The bank allowed the prayer of Mr. Singh and established the week of July 21 for the audience.
Apart from Mr. Ramesh, two similar pils presented by Shyam Lal Pal and activist Anjali Bhardwaj are pending.
The main defenders Kapil Sibal and Abhishek Singhvi represented Mr. Rameh.
The petitioners have said that the amendments to the realization of electoral rules in 1961 became “very intelligently” and prohibited any access to CCTV images to affirm that their voter identity.
Mr. Singhvi said previously that the voting options were never revealed and that CCTV’s footage might not reveal votes and urged the bank to ask the voting panel and the center to present their answers before the next audition date.
Mr. Ramesh’s plea appeared in December and expressed “hope” that the Apex court would help “restore the rapid integrity” of the electoral process.
The Government has modified an electoral rule to avoid public inspection of certain electronic documents, such as the CCTV Chamber and web transmission images, in addition to videos of candidates to avoid misuse.
“The integrity of the electoral process is rapidly eroding. Hopefully the Supreme Court helps restore it,” Ramesh said.
Based on the recommendation of ECS, the Ministry of Law of the Union in December modified rule 93 (a) of the 1961 rules, to restrict the type of “documents” or documents open to public inspection.
Mr. Bhardwaj, in his separate statement submitted through the lawyer Prashant Bhushan, challenged the recent amendment to the electoral rules that supposedly restrict public access to records related to elections.
The Pil challenges the validity of the conduct of the election rules (second amendment), 2024 and argues the amendment to rule 93 (2) (a) of the conduct of the electoral rules, 1961 violates articles 14, 19 and 21 of the sections of the city of the Constitution.
Before the amendment, rule 93 (2) (a) always provided that “all other documents related to the election will be open to public inspection.”
“The contested amendment is a shameless violation of article 19 (1) and 21 of the Constitution of India, since it brings opaque and restricts the fundamental right of people to access vital documents and documents related to the elections,” said the Pleea.
The amendment, said the plea, tried to reduce and restrict public access to records related to elections, rule 93 (a) of the conduct of the 1961 elections rules before amendment 2024.
It is said that the new amendment has modified the provision to “all other documents as specific in these rules related to the elections will be open to the public inspection.”
The petitioner argued that the change introduced new and arbitrary restrictions on public access, the transparency of limitation in the electoral process.
The Poba said that the amendment infringed the fundamental right to information intertwined in article 19 (1) (a) and the right to a free and fair election under article 21.
He affirmed that the amendment reduced the public scrutiny of the electoral records, which led to a reduction in transparency and facilitated corrupt practices.
The amendment, said the plea, imposed arbitrary restrictions by restricting access to only those records mentioned explicitly in the rules, excluding others without justification.
By limiting access to electoral documents, the amendment is considered as opposed to the spirit of the RTI Law, which promotes government responsibility and transparency, he added.
Published – April 17, 2025 2:02 pm ist
