Context:

The Supreme Court has referred to a 1977 judgment in the case of M.S. Gill versus Chief Election Commissioner while hearing a petition challenging the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls in Bihar. The court's observation emphasizes that the Constitution does not grant the Election Commission unchecked powers.

Key Points from the 1977 Judgment

·        Limitations on Election Commission's Power: The Supreme Court noted that Article 324 of the Constitution, which grants the Election Commission powers of "superintendence, direction, and control" over elections, does not make it a "law unto itself". The commission must act fairly and legally, and its discretion should be used properly, not perversely.

·        Free and Fair Elections: The judgment emphasized that free and fair elections based on universal adult franchise are fundamental to Indian democracy. The court cautioned against creating a "constitutional despot" where the Election Commission's powers go unchecked.

·        Judicial Review: The Supreme Court highlighted its authority to strike down the Election Commission's decisions if they are misused or unfair.

Background of the 1977 Judgment:

The 1977 judgment was based on a reference after the Election Commission canceled the election to the 13-Ferozepur parliamentary constituency in Punjab due to mob violence and ordered fresh elections. The Supreme Court upheld the Election Commission's power to cancel elections and order fresh polls under Article 324 but emphasized that this power should not be used arbitrarily.

Current Challenge in Bihar

The petitioners, including Opposition parties, argue that the SIR exercise in Bihar may disenfranchise marginalized communities and claim that the process is arbitrary and violative of electoral laws. The Supreme Court will further discuss the matter on July 10, considering the principles laid down in the 1977 judgment.

Implications of the Judgment

The Supreme Court's reference to the 1977 verdict underscores the importance of ensuring that the Election Commission exercises its powers fairly and transparently. The judgment will likely shape the court's deliberations on whether the Bihar SIR exercise meets constitutional and legal standards.

Conclusion

The Supreme Court's observation highlights the need for the Election Commission to balance its powers with fairness and transparency. As the court continues to hear the petition challenging the SIR exercise in Bihar, the principles laid down in the 1977 judgment will be crucial in determining the legitimacy of the Election Commission's actions