SC To Examine Legal Immunity Granted To Chief Election Commissioner, ECs
The Supreme Court on Wednesday agreed to hear petitions challenging the constitutional validity of a provision granting blanket immunity from civil and criminal prosecution to the Chief Election Commissioner (CEC) and Election Commissioners (ECs) for actions performed in the discharge of their official duties.
A three-judge bench headed by Chief Justice Surya Kant, along with Justices Joymalya Bagchi and V Mohana, issued notices to the Centre and sought its response within four weeks. The court decided to tag the petitions filed by Rashtriya Janata Dal (RJD) MP Manoj Jha and activist Arun Agrawal with another pending case concerning the same issue. The matter has been listed for further hearing on December 18.
The petitions challenge 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 anyone who is or was a CEC or Election Commissioner for anything done, said or purportedly done while discharging official duties.
Jha argued that the provision grants constitutional functionaries protection wider than that available to the President, members of Parliament and judges. He contended that it could prevent prosecution for serious offences, including corruption and bribery, even after an election commissioner retires. He also maintained that Article 324 of the Constitution guarantees the Election Commission's independence but does not provide immunity from prosecution.
Agrawal, in his petition, argued that the expressions "is or was" effectively grant lifelong immunity, while "purporting to act" could protect actions beyond lawful authority. He said the provision fails to distinguish between legitimate official decisions and misconduct, including corruption and forgery, thereby weakening judicial accountability.
Both petitioners maintained that protecting the Election Commission's independence should not mean placing its officials above the law. They argued that safeguards against frivolous complaints and prior judicial scrutiny could prevent harassment without granting blanket immunity.