Monitor this situation.
Unsubscribe anytime.
[SITUATION] · [QUIET] · [POLITICS]
2 clusters · 19 sources · 1 days · First seen · Last updated
Indian judicial warnings on voter disenfranchisement
Overview
Supreme Court Justice Ujjal Bhuyan has issued warnings regarding the potential mass disenfranchisement of Indian citizens, describing such processes as ‘intrinsically arbitrary’ and a violation of the Constitution’s basic structure. Speaking at NALSAR University, Bhuyan emphasized that the Constitution does not recognize two classes of citizens—those with voting rights and those without—and noted that voter names must not be removed from electoral rolls without proper notice and hearings, except in cases of death.
These judicial remarks have intensified political pressure on Chief Election Commissioner (CEC) Gyanesh Kumar, with the Congress party demanding his resignation. While the Supreme Court declined an interim plea to suspend the CEC, citing concerns over the practical implications for election conduct, the Court has issued notices to the government and the Election Commission of India. The Court directed the Commission to ensure that decisions are made through a collective, unanimous, or majority framework rather than unilaterally.
In related commentary, former Justice Rohinton Nariman expressed concern that the right to vote is in ‘great peril,’ citing instances where 90 lakh citizens were disenfranchised. Nariman also criticized legislative changes that increased executive dominance over the appointment of Election Commissioners, noting that 93 percent of decided appeals in such cases favored the excluded citizens.
Entities
Gyanesh Kumar · Supreme Court of India · Ajul Bhuiyan · Shiv Sena (UBT) · National Academy of Legal Studies and Research
Claims
What the coverage asserts, and how many sources carry each claim.
- [● 12 SOURCES] Supreme Court Justice Ujjal Bhuyan stated that mass disenfranchisement is intrinsically arbitrary and negates the constitutional order.
- [● 8 SOURCES] Mass disenfranchisement violates Articles 326 and 14 of the Indian Constitution.
- [● 3 SOURCES] Voter names cannot be removed from electoral rolls without notice and a hearing, except in the case of deceased voters.
- [○ 1 SOURCE] Former Supreme Court Justice Rohinton Nariman stated that the right to vote in India is in great peril.
- [○ 1 SOURCE] Justice Nariman reported that 90 lakh citizens were disenfranchised.
- [○ 1 SOURCE] Of 1 lakh decided appeals regarding disenfranchisement, 93 percent were decided in favor of the excluded citizens.
- [○ 1 SOURCE] Legislative changes in 2023 replaced the Chief Justice of India with a Union Cabinet Minister in the Election Commissioner selection panel.
Timeline
-
[POLITICS] 2 sourcesJustice Ajul Bhuiyan declares mass deprivation of voting rights unconstitutional
Supreme Court Justice Ajul Bhuiyan ruled that mass deprivation of voting rights is unconstitutional, fueling political protests and calls for the Chief Election Commissioner's resignation in India.
-
[POLITICS] 17 sourcesIndia Supreme Court Justice warns mass disenfranchisement is unconstitutional
Supreme Court Justice Ujjal Bhuyan has called mass voter disenfranchisement ‘intrinsically arbitrary,’ fueling political demands for the resignation of Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar.
Sources
barandbench.com · desitalkchicago.com · dnaindia.com · english.mathrubhumi.com · highlandpost.com · latestly.com · lawchakra.in · madhyamamonline.com · nationalheraldindia.com · newindianexpress.com · news.abplive.com · newsable.asianetnews.com · newsbytesapp.com · qaumitanzeem.com · radianceweekly.net · sahilonline.net · sentinelassam.com · thefederal.com · zoomnews.in
This summary has been updated 1 time: see revision history