New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Monday said that the Election Commission of India (ECI) is expected to act in accordance with the law while hearing a group
of pleas seeking action against Chief Election Commissioner (CEC) Gyanesh Kumar over the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls across the country. The top court Bench, comprising Chief Justice of India (CJI) Surya Kant, Justice Joymalya Bagchi and Justice V Mohana, also issued notice to the poll body and the CEC. CJI Surya Kant, while referring to reports cited in the matter, said, “News report may be fully or partially correct. We will like their response.” The court said it would hear the responses of the concerned respondents before proceeding further. The CJI further said, “We will seek response of respondent 5-8 also. They will respond to us. There's a law, they are expected to follow. If we find that law was not followed, you know what can happen.” Senior advocate Vikas Singh, appearing for one of the petitioners, Rakesh Kumar Singh, submitted that the statutory framework governing the Election Commission cannot be violated. “Your lordships must make clear that statutory scheme can't be violated,” Singh told the bench. Singh argued that decisions of the Election Commission have to be unanimous and that the CEC cannot take unilateral decisions. He also challenged the legal protection against prosecution available to the CEC and ECs, arguing that such immunity was not enjoyed even by the Prime Minister or Supreme Court judges. Seeking interim relief, Singh urged the court to “suspend the CEC immediately” and asked the bench to pass interim directions. He warned the court, “or else the country will burn.” The petitioner’s counsel further argued that such protection from prosecution is enjoyed only by the President and pressed for immediate intervention in the matter. While hearing another plea regarding the SIR, the Supreme Court agreed to examine the validity of the immunity shield and the allegations concerning unilateral decisions by the CEC. However, the court declined to pass an interim order restraining the CEC from taking decisions without unanimity among the Election Commissioners. Notably, The PIL, filed by Patna resident Rakesh Kumar Singh, had urged the top court to determine whether Kumar has been individually exercising powers that legally belong to the EC as a whole, and, if so, to declare those actions unauthorised and take appropriate legal action. A political row erupted after the Indian Express report flagging dissent within the poll panel over the SIR exercise. As per the report, two Election Commissioners, Sukhbir Singh Sandhu and Vivek Joshi, had red-flagged issues relating to deletion of names under the of electoral rolls and raised objections to the decision-making process 14 times in the past few months. Reacting to it, the EC has asserted that differing views and observations are a normal part of deliberation in any institution and all its orders "are an outcome of the unanimous decisions of the full Commission in the past one year".
