The petitioner argues that voters, candidates and citizens have no recourse against alleged mala fide actions by the Commission
The Supreme Court on Wednesday sought responses from the Centre and the Election Commission of India (ECI) on a petition challenging the constitutional validity of a provision that grants blanket legal immunity to the Chief Election Commissioner (CEC) and Election Commissioners for acts performed in their official capacity.
A bench comprising Chief Justice of India Surya Kant and Justices Joymalya Bagchi and V Mohana issued notices on the petition, filed by activist-lawyer Arun Kumar Agrawal. It challenges Section 16 of the Chief Election Commissioner and Other Election Commissioners (Appointment, Conditions of Service and Term of Office) Act, 2023, which bars civil and criminal proceedings against the CEC and Election Commissioners for acts done in the discharge of their official duties.
The petitioner has argued that the immunity is excessive and unconstitutional because it carves out no exception even for acts allegedly committed without good faith. The plea says the independence of the Election Commission does not mean its members should be free from legal accountability.
It has also argued that safeguards against frivolous complaints, along with prior judicial scrutiny, would adequately protect election commissioners without barring legal remedies altogether. The blanket protection, it contends, leaves voters, candidates and citizens without recourse against alleged wrongful or mala fide actions by the Commission.
The plea further questions the manner in which the immunity clause entered the law, alleging that it was introduced through an amendment to the 2023 Bill without adequate justification for such sweeping protection.
The petitioner has cited concerns over the ongoing Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls, including reported objections by election commissioners to aspects of the exercise and alleged concerns over the software being used. It also refers to allegations about CEC Gyanesh Kumar’s conduct during his earlier tenure as Kerala’s Public Works Department Secretary, arguing that immunity should not extend to acts lacking good faith. The petitioner has urged the apex court to strike down Section 16 as unconstitutional.
For all the latest updates, download PGurus App.
- Nvidia CEO Jensen Huang Resigns Amid Scandal, CFO Colette Kress Named Interim Chief - November 12, 2026
- Threat Note In Lavatory Triggers Hijack Alert On Air India Flight At Kolkata - November 11, 2026
- Sonia Gandhi’s Memoir Has Wrong Dates For RSS, Anna Movement, Readers Say - November 11, 2026
Whatever applies to EC must apply to SC both are constitutional bodies manned by wise men of integrity but unelected so why there be different yard sticks ? In both the cases there is no recourse against an alleged mala fide action.