Supreme Court to Hear Plea Challenging Lifelong Immunity to Election Commissioners

'We will examine the matter to determine whether this provision is causing any harm and whether such an exemption can be granted under the Constitution,” the court said.

The Wire Staff

'We will examine the matter to determine whether this provision is causing any harm and whether such an exemption can be granted under the Constitution,” the court said.

supreme court to hear plea challenging lifelong immunity to election commissioners

View of the Supreme Court of India, in New Delhi. Photo: PTI.

New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Monday issued notices to the Union government and the Election Commission of India (ECI) seeking their response to a public interest litigation (PIL) challenging lifelong immunity granted to the Chief Election Commissioner (CEC) and Election Commissioners (ECs).

A bench comprising Chief Justice of India Surya Kant and Justice Joymalya Bagchi were hearing a plea filed by NGO Lok Prahari concerning section 16 of the The Chief Election Commissioner And Other Election Commissioners (Appointment, Conditions of Service And Term of Office) Act, 2023.

The section states: “Notwithstanding anything contained in any other law for the time being in force, no Court shall entertain or continue any civil or criminal proceedings against any person who is or was a Chief Election Commissioner or an Election Commissioner for any act, thing or word, committed, done or spoken by him when, or in the course of acting or purporting to act in the discharge of his official duty or function.”

The petitioner argued that such immunity, which is not available to even the president or governors, should not be granted to election officials.

Lok Prahari said that a Union minister had stated in Parliament that the 2023 law only dealt with service conditions, arguing that protection from criminal prosecution cannot be treated as a service condition. Further, the provision was not part of the original Bill, but added at the last minute.

The petitioner argued that such a provision harms free and fair elections and urged for an immediate stay “in view of the gravity of the continuing irreparable loss caused to the cause of free and fair election"

The Supreme Court, while agreeing to hear the matter, said that an immediate stay on the provision was not required.

“This is an important issue. We will examine the matter to determine whether this provision is causing any harm and whether such an exemption can be granted under the Constitution,” the bench said.

This article went live on January thirteenth, two thousand twenty six, at twenty-three minutes past twelve at noon.

The Wire is now on WhatsApp. Follow our channel for sharp analysis and opinions on the latest developments.