Supreme Court raised serious questions on the effect of NOTA
Know the main points and gist of the news at a glance
Digital Desk, New Delhi. The Supreme Court, while hearing an important PIL on Tuesday, raised serious questions on the impact of 'NOTA'. The court asked whether the option of 'NOTA' in the assembly and general elections has improved the 'quality of elected leaders'?
A bench of Chief Justice Surya Kant and Justice Joymalya Bagchi clarified that 'NOTA' (none of the above) cannot be an entity in itself as it cannot fill any vacant seat despite getting the maximum votes.
Demand for 'NOTA' in the case of a single candidate. This hearing was being held on a petition filed by 'Vidhi Center for Legal Policy', in which the validity of Section 53(2) of the Representation of the People Act, 1951 has been challenged.
Supreme Court raised serious questions on the effect of NOTA
The petition argues that the current law prevents voters from using 'NOTA' in seats where only one candidate is in the fray. At present, if the candidate and the number of seats are equal, the returning officer declares him the winner unopposed.
Justice Bagchi remarked during the hearing, 'Has there been any improvement in the quality of elected leaders with the introduction of 'NOTA'?' Concern over the apathy of educated voters: During the hearing, the bench also expressed concern over other aspects related to the election process. The court said that efforts should be made to make voting mandatory to ensure the victory of good candidates.
The court expressed regret over the trend that 'educated and affluent voters turn out to vote much less in elections than the uneducated and women.' Attorney General R. Venkataramani opposed the petition saying that the law cannot be tested on hypothetical grounds. He stressed that 'the right to vote is a constitutional right.'
Court expressed concern over the apathy of educated voters
Legal complications and basis of the petition: According to the petitioner, since 1952 till now about 82 lakh voters have been deprived of exercising their franchise due to unopposed elections. The petition demands that Rule 11 of the Election Conduct Rules, 1961 should be cancelled.
NOTA should be made mandatory in all elections, even if there is only one candidate. Voters should have the right to cast a negative vote, which is part of the freedom of expression under Article 19(1)(a).
However, the Supreme Court has fixed March 17 for the next hearing of this case. Earlier in October 2024, the court had issued a notice to the Center and the Election Commission seeking their response on this issue.
(With inputs from news agency PTI)
Chyawanprash is a part of every Indian's life, it reduces diseases and increases energy.