Supreme Court dismisses plea challenging open ballot system in Rajya Sabha polls

The Supreme Court on Monday dismissed a petition by NGO Lok Prahari challenging certain provisions of the Conduct Of Election Rules, 1961 which provide for open ballot system in Rajya Sabha polls. .A bench of Chief Justice of India (CJI) DY Chandrachud and Justices PS Narasimha and JB Pardiwala said that this system was earlier upheld by a constitution bench of the top court in the case of Kuldeep Nayyar vs Union Of India and there was no need to tinker with the same. The Court further noted that in the Kuldeep Nayyar case, a constitution bench had held that an open ballot system does not mean it is open to one and all, but only to the authorised political party representative and the same was necessary to prevent cross voting. "The Court in Kuldeep Nayyar held that underlining basis of open ballot was needed to prevent cross voting and maintain party discipline," the bench said..The petitioner-NGO moved the Court challenging the constitutional validity of the amendment which added Rule 39AA, thereby, introducing the open ballot system in February 2004. The rule requires an MLA or an MP to show their ballot paper to a polling agent during Rajya Sabha and state legislative council polls..It was submitted that the amendment was violative of Articles 80(4) and 14 of the Constitution besides being contrary to section 123(2) of the Representation of People Act (RPA).According to the petitioner, a consequence of the rules was that an elector would lose his right to vote under Article 80(4)..While dismissing the petition, the Court underscored that open ballot system was only in place to prevent cross-voting and thus does not violate the concept of free and fair elections. "The cancellation of ballot where the elector refuses to disclose it to the agent of his political party..it would be far fetched to still sustain the vote by casting burden on the presiding officer. Kuldeep Nayyar case held that it does not violate the principle of free and fair voting," the bench explained..[Read our live-coverage of the hearing below].[Read order]