Blog

Case Title: ASSOCIATION FOR DEMOCRATIC REFORMS VERSUS ELECTION COMMISSION OF INDIA AND ANOTHER

Case No: WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) NO. 434 OF 2023

Decided on: 26th April, 2024

Quorum: THE HON’BLE MR JUSTICE SANJIV KHANNA

Facts of the case

When the relief sought in a current petition is the identical as that sought in a prior petition that the Court dismissed, the law of res judicata applies to writ petitions, rendering the Court’s decision final . The facts center on the question of accountability and openness in Indian elections. The Election Commission of India was challenged by the Association for Democratic Reforms (ADR) over the publication of candidates’ financial details, criminal histories, and educational backgrounds. In order for voters to make educated judgments during elections, ADR claimed that they have a right to know these data. The case brings up significant issues regarding how to strike a balance between candidates’ right to privacy and the openness required for a democratic election process. The revelation of candidates’ criminal histories, bank account details, and educational backgrounds was the primary concern. In order for voters to make educated decisions during elections, the Association for Democratic Reforms (ADR) thought that this information should be available to them. This issue brings to light the conflict between the right to privacy of candidates and the need for openness in a democratic election process.

Appellant Contentions

The materials talk about the difficulties with the electoral process and Electronic Voting Machines (EVMs). Rather than going back to the paper ballot system, they emphasize the necessity for technological developments, openness, and faith in the system. The petitioners’ arguments are carefully considered, with a focus on the need for proof to support assertions and the court’s duty in maintaining free and fair elections. The papers also discuss the res judicata principles, which prohibit litigation of settled matters, particularly in circumstances of significant public interest when proof of permanent injury is essential.

Respondent Contentions

In response to the respondent’s argument, the documents highlight the growing voting percentage over time, which indicates faith in the current system and highlights the trust that voters have in Electronic Voting Machines (EVMs). The petitioners’ claim that they have a right to information about the voting process is examined, emphasizing how crucial it is to precisely record and tally votes a goal that the existing voting system, which uses EVMs and VVPAT slips, attempts to accomplish.

Court Analysis and Judgement

In discussing the application of res judicata principles to writ petitions, the judgment emphasizes how court rulings are binding under Article 226 unless they are overturned on appeal. It makes clear that the plea of res judicata based on the Court’s final decision is unaffected by the dismissal of a special leave petition. The paper also discusses the necessity of a fair, evidence-based approach to system review and development and the requirement for sufficient evidence to contest the Electronic Voting Machines (EVMs).

“PRIME LEGAL is a full-service law firm that has won a National Award and has more than 20 years of experience in an array of sectors and practice areas. Prime legal fall into a category of best law firm, best lawyer, best family lawyer, best divorce lawyer, best divorce law firm, best criminal lawyer, best criminal law firm, best consumer lawyer, best civil lawyer.”

Judgement Analysis Written by – K.Immey Grace

Click here to read the judgement