New Delhi, November 4: The Supreme Court on Wednesday sought responses from the Central government and the Election Commission of India (ECI) on a petition challenging the blanket legal immunity granted to the Chief Election Commissioner (CEC) and Election Commissioners, Bar and Bench and India Legal reported.

Source: Bar and Bench

A bench of Chief Justice of India Surya Kant and Justices Joymalya Bagchi and V Mohana issued notice on the petition filed by activist and lawyer Arun Kumar Agrawal. Advocate Neha Rathi appeared for the petitioner.

The plea challenges the constitutional validity of Section 16 of the Chief Election Commissioner and Other Election Commissioners (Appointment, Conditions of Service and Term of Office) Act, 2023. The provision bars courts from entertaining or continuing civil or criminal proceedings against a person who is or was a CEC or Election Commissioner for any act, matter or statement made while acting in the discharge of official duties — protection that, the reports note, is lifelong.

What the petition argues

The petition contends, as reported, that similar protection for other constitutional functionaries usually extends only to acts done or intended to be done in good faith, and that the Election Commission conducted elections successfully for decades without such blanket immunity. It argues the shield is unconstitutional and disproportionate, and that protecting commissioners from vexatious proceedings could be achieved through less restrictive measures such as safeguards against frivolous complaints and prior judicial scrutiny.

"A voter whose name is wrongly deleted from the electoral roll, a candidate prejudiced by a mala fide act, and any citizen aggrieved by corruption in the functioning of the Commission are left without a remedy," the plea states, according to Bar and Bench. The petitioner has also alleged — as an allegation in the plea, not a court finding — that the immunity clause was added to the Bill by a later amendment without stated reasons and was passed when a large number of Opposition MPs were under suspension.

The plea further refers, as reported, to alleged irregularities in the ongoing Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls and to questions the petitioner raises about the present CEC, Gyanesh Kumar, in relation to allegations dating back to his tenure as Secretary of the Public Works Department in Kerala. These are the petitioner's allegations, cited in the plea; the Court has made no finding on them.

In a related hearing the same day, LiveLaw reported, the Court also took up RJD MP Manoj Jha's plea challenging Section 16, with the CJI observing that a similar matter was pending and asking parties to stop filing further petitions so pleadings could be completed and the main issue heard. The Centre and the ECI will now file their responses to the notice, and the challenge to Section 16 will be taken up after replies are complete.