Supreme Court sets aside Rajasthan Election Commission's refusal to allow awareness campaigns by civil society group

The Supreme Court on Monday set aside the Rajasthan State Election Commission's decision to deny permission to a civil society group to conduct voter awareness campaigns ahead of local body elections in the State [Aruna Roy & Anr. v Union of India].

A Bench of Chief Justice of India (CJI) Surya Kant, Justice Joymalya Bagchi and Justice V Mohana directed the State Election Commission to reconsider the request of the petitioner-body within 48 hours.

"The State Election Commission, Rajasthan, is directed to reconsider the petitioners' request for permitting them to conduct voter awareness campaigns as per the list appended to the application. Let them decide within 48 hours. Their earlier order is set aside," ordered CJI Kant.

The Court further observed that the State Election Commission could not prevent other organisations from conducting voter awareness programmes merely because it was organising similar activities itself.

"Everyone has a right to go for voter awareness. You should welcome it," said Justice Bagchi.

Rajasthan is currently conducting its Panchayati Raj elections in four phases. Polling for Zila Parishad and Panchayat Samiti members is scheduled for November 14 in the final phase, while elections for Sarpanch and Panch posts will be held on November 16.

The elections cover 41 Zila Parishads, 457 Panchayat Samitis and 14,403 Gram Panchayats. More than 4.03 crore voters are reportedly eligible to participate.

The plea before the Supreme Court was filed by social activist Aruna Roy, represented by advocate Prashant Bhushan. It challenged the Rajasthan State Election Commission's refusal to grant permission to conduct voter awareness campaigns ahead of the local body elections.

Bhushan told the Court that the campaign, which has been conducted since 2004, seeks to educate voters about their democratic rights, including the option of choosing None of the Above (NOTA), and to discourage them from accepting money or other inducements in exchange for votes.

He submitted that the campaign did not support or oppose any candidate and involved small groups conducting interactive sessions in villages.

The State Election Commission opposed the request, arguing that it had examined the representation and found that the proposed campaign could be at the behest of someone else. It also submitted that it was already conducting voter awareness programmes of its own.

Justice Bagchi rejected this as a justification for denying permission.

"That is not something within your domain. If you are conducting it, that does not stand in the way of any other authority conducting a voter awareness exercise. You cannot restrict people from doing it. They will be your helping hand. If they indulge in any corrupt practice in the name of voter awareness, you are there to regulate. But you cannot take over or monopolise voter awareness exercises," held Justice Bagchi.

The Court also considered the authorities' reliance on prohibitory orders under Section 163 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), which empowers authorities to issue orders to prevent disturbances. It had been imposed across Jaipur during the election period.

Bhushan submitted that the authorities had cited these restrictions to reject the group's applications, even though the proposed campaign would involve no more than 20 people.

Justice Bagchi then observed that the restrictions did not prevent people from holding meetings or processions after obtaining prior permission.

"You must specify the place, date and time of the proposed programme. You cannot seek general permission," he told Bhushan.

Bhushan, however, pointed out that the group had applied for permission twice but its requests had been rejected.

"Permission can be granted. We will direct them to reconsider afresh. They cannot reject it merely on that ground," said the Court.

In its order, the Court impleaded the Rajasthan State Election Commission as a respondent and set aside its earlier decision rejecting the request.

[Read Live Coverage]