Syllabus: Indian Constitution—historical underpinnings, evolution, features, amendments, significant provisions and basic structure.
Context
- Centre argued in Supreme Court: ‘right to vote’ different from ‘freedom of voting’ having distinct constitutional status.
- Right to vote: mere statutory right while Freedom of voting is part of fundamental right to freedom of speech and expression.
Legal Challenge
- Petition seeks to declare Section 53(2) of Representation of the People Act, 1951 ultra vires Constitution violating rights.
- Section 53(2) applies when number of candidates equals number of seats in Assembly or Lok Sabha election.
- Also challenges Rule 11 read with Forms 21 and 21B of Conduct of Elections Rules, 1961 applying to ‘uncontested elections’.
- Uncontested Elections Procedure: Provision instructs Returning Officer (RO) to declare all candidates as duly elected by filling Form 21 (general election) or Form 21B (casual vacancy).
- Alleged violation: freedom of speech and expression under Article 19(1)(a) of Constitution limiting voter expression.
Argument and Response
- Petitioners’ Argument
- RO’s declaration without conducting poll prevents citizens from expressing right to vote ‘None of the Above’ (NOTA).
- Citizens unable to voice dissatisfaction about contesting candidate violating their right to express choice effectively.
- Government Response:
- Centre’s affidavit began with fundamental lesson on difference between ‘right to vote’ and ‘freedom of voting’ clarifying distinction.
Q- The Right to Vote is a statutory right, but the Freedom to Vote is a constitutional guarantee. Examine this distinction and its implications for electoral integrity in India. (15 marks)