NEW DELHI: Supreme Court on Wednesday said instilling confidence in the election process was vital for democracy and the rule of law as it directed Andhra Pradesh State Election Commission (SEC) not to declare the final candidate list for 19 of the 100 local bodies where opposition YSRCP has alleged that its candidates were prevented from filing nominations. However, the court refused to tinker with the Oct 28 polling date.An autumn-break bench of Justices Joymalya Bagchi and VMohana asked SEC to decide by Thursday if it should, after considering representations from candidates alleging use of force to prevent them from filing nominations, give additional time for filing of nominations or postpone polls. Accepting the suggestion of senior advocate Maninder Singh, who appeared for YSRCP, SC asked DGP to give adequate security at nomination filing centres and to candidates.
YSRCP importing criminals from Punjab: AP govt in SC
Senior advocate Maninder Singh, who appeared for YSRCP, said in 19 of the 100 urban local bodies — 13 municipal corporations and 87 municipalities/nagar panchayats — more than 63% of YSRCP candidates were prevented from filing nominations or their nomination papers were torn. Senior advocate Sidharth Luthra, for AP govt, said YSRCP was importing criminal elements from as far as Punjab and fomenting violence only to cry wolf later. SEC, through senior advocate K Parameswar, denied YSRCP’s claims.The SC bench said, “Free and fair elections are a basic structure of the Constitution. Right to participate in such elections by filing nomination papers is a facet of the free and fair election process. It is the constitutional mandate to vest the SEC with the duty of conducting and supervising such elections which would necessarily include all steps to ensure free and transparent filing of nomination papers by contesting candidates. The power of constitutional courts in exercise of judicial review, though deferential to the conduct of elections by the EC, cannot be said to be only nugatory.”SC said it was the duty of SEC to direct the state law-enforcing machinery to provide adequate security and maintain law and order to provide candidates a secure environment to file their nomination papers in a peaceful manner.Referring to Singh’s allegations that the state police were, at times, indifferent or selective in registering complaints of YSRCP candidates, Parameswar said SEC had issued directions to police and Luthra said police had taken adequate measures to control law and order issues.Referring to the allegations of the principal opposition party, backed by prima facie material of violence unleashed to prevent filing of nominations, SC said, “We are conscious of judicial deference to the powers of control and superintendence of elections by EC. Such philosophy of deference has grown from a doctrine of necessity that the election process be entrusted in the hands of an independent constitutional authority and the process completed within a specified period and not get mired in the quagmire of judicial interference.
Share your thoughts in the comments
Be respectful · TOI community guidelines
“…It also cannot be ignored that the custody of constitutional values lies with constitutional courts and the power of judicial review to ensure fair and impartial elections cannot be wholly muted when the principal opposition political party in a state is before us and has placed on record representations and material expressing serious apprehensions with regard to hindrance in participation in election process through filing of nomination papers.”
