The Bombay High Court considering the steps taken by ECI in educating the people about the NOTA option, dismissed the PIL which sought for enhancement on the same
Case title: Suhas Manohar Wankhede Vs Election Commission of India & Ors.
Case no.: PIL NO. 33 of 2024
Decision on: March 22nd, 2024
Quoram: Justice Ravindra V. Ghuge AND Justice R. M. Joshi
Facts of the case
The petitioner through a PIL expressed concerns about the Election Commission of India’s endeavour to educate voters about Electronic Voting Machines (EVMs) specifically the use of the ‘None of the Above’ (NOTA) option. The petitioner pleaded the ECI to appoint a brand ambassador and initiate a campaign on promoting awareness and understanding of the NOTA option. He placed reliance on People’s Union for Civil Liberties and Anr Vs. Union of India and Anr. case, in line of his plea.
The Counsel for the Union of India and the Election Commission of India submitted that since the Petitioner had earlier filed a PIL on an identical matter, this Court should not entertain the instant Petition and contended that it deserves to be dismissed with heavy costs as it is publicity oriented.
Court’s Analysis and Judgement
The Court on perusal of the submissions made by the parties and the earlier PIL on the subject matter noted that the pleadings presented in the instant case are identical earlier PIL filed by this Petitioner, wherein the petitioner aggrieved that the Election Commission of India (ECI) is violating the directives of the Supreme Court. The petitioner referenced the same judgment as in the earlier case to support his claims.
The court examined a pamphlet titled “Chunav Ka Parv, Desh Ka Garv, Lok Sabha Election 2024” presented by the ECI, which served as a pictorial guide to the voters. The Court noted that the pamphlet contained information on the voting process, including the use of EVMs and the NOTA option. It elaborated on the steps to spread awareness among the voters on, (a) the process of registration online as well as off line, (b) verification of details, (c) enrolment as a new voter, (d) method of searching the name in the voters’ list, etc. So also, the voter is made aware that a holiday is declared on the polling day to facilitate casting of vote. A catchy statement is also set out as “It is not a holiday, it is a voting day”.
The Court further brought out the rulings of Apex Court in People’s Union for Civil Liberties and another case. The Supreme Court in this case declared that Rules 41(2) and (3) and 49-O of the Conduct of Election Rules, 1961 were ultra vires to section 128 of the Representation of the People Act and Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution of India, to the extent that they violate secrecy of voting. The Election Commission was directed to make a necessary provision in the ballot paper/EVMs and add another button called “NOTA” in the EVMs, so that the voters who come to the polling booth and decide not to vote for any candidate, are able to exercise their right to vote for NOTA, while maintaining their right of secrecy. The Election Commission was directed to undertake an awareness programme to educate the masses.
The Court, in light of the above findings noted that the Election Commission has already come out with a manual on Systematic Voters Education and Electoral Participation (SVEEP), in July 2020. Moreover, considering the steps taken by the ECI and the State Election Commission and the fact that this Petitioner had filed an identical Petition earlier, the Court dismissed the present PIL petition. However, it refrained from imposing costs on the petitioner as he was a Ph.D. student and directed the registry to scrutinize any future petitions filed by him on similar issues before registering them.
“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 Reviewed by – Keerthi K