New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Wednesday sought responses from the Centre and the Election Commission of India (ECI) on a petition challenging the constitutional validity of a provision granting blanket legal immunity to the Chief Election Commissioner (CEC) and Election Commissioners for actions performed in their official capacity.
A bench comprising Chief Justice of India Surya Kant and Justices Joymalya Bagchi and V Mohana issued notices on a petition filed by activist-lawyer Arun Kumar Agrawal, challenging Section 16 of the Chief Election Commissioner and Other Election Commissioners (Appointment, Conditions of Service and Term of Office) Act, 2023.
Section 16 bars civil and criminal proceedings against the CEC and Election Commissioners for acts performed in the discharge of their official duties.
The petitioner has argued that the immunity is excessive and unconstitutional, as it provides no exception even for acts allegedly committed without good faith.
“Independence of the Election Commission does not mean that its members should be free from legal accountability,” the plea states.
It further argued that safeguards against frivolous complaints and prior judicial scrutiny would adequately protect election commissioners without completely restricting legal remedies.
According to the petition, the blanket protection leaves voters, candidates and citizens without recourse against alleged wrongful or mala fide actions by the Commission.
The plea also questioned the manner in which the immunity clause was introduced through an amendment to the 2023 Bill, alleging that no adequate justification was provided for granting such sweeping protection.
The petitioner cited concerns surrounding the ongoing Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls, including reported objections by election commissioners to certain aspects of the exercise and alleged concerns over the software being used.
It also referred to allegations concerning CEC Gyanesh Kumar’s conduct during his earlier tenure as Kerala’s Public Works Department Secretary, arguing that blanket immunity should not cover acts lacking good faith.
The petitioner has urged the Supreme Court to strike down Section 16 as unconstitutional.
