SC advocate seeks contempt action against CEC Gyanesh Kumar
What's the story
A Supreme Court advocate has sought the Attorney General for India's consent to initiate criminal contempt proceedings against Chief Election Commissioner (CEC) Gyanesh Kumar. The advocate, Brajesh Singh, alleges that Kumar willfully disobeyed Supreme Court judgments on the functioning of the Election Commission of India (ECI). In his letter to the Attorney General, Singh invoked Section 15(1)(b) of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971, and Rule 3 of the Rules to Regulate Proceedings for Contempt of the Supreme Court, 1975.
Disputed decisions
Petition follows report highlighting internal rift in ECI
The petition comes after a report by The Indian Express on September 23, which stated that Election Commissioners Sukhbir Singh Sandhu and Vivek Joshi had raised objections on at least 14 occasions in the last 10 months over decisions taken by the poll panel without their knowledge or approval.
These objections were related to changes in Form 6, the addition and deletion of names from electoral rolls, and centralization of access to the electoral-roll database.
Legal grounds
CEC not an absolute authority: Singh cites Supreme Court ruling
According to LiveLaw, one of the main grounds for the contempt petition is an alleged violation of the Supreme Court's judgment in T.N. Seshan v. Union of India.
Singh argues that this judgment mandates the ECI to function as a multi-member constitutional body, with the CEC being primus inter pares and not an absolute authority.
The Supreme Court had ruled in T.N. Seshan that decisions of a multi-member ECI are collective decisions, not just those of its chairman.
Recent ruling
'Independent ECI essential for free and fair elections'
Singh also cited the Supreme Court's 2023 judgment in Anoop Baranwal v. Union of India, which emphasized the need for an independent ECI to ensure free and fair elections.
The judgment underscored that the ECI is tasked with conducting elections impartially and transparently.
The contempt petition argues that bypassing other Election Commissioners while issuing decisions or communications in the name of the "Full Commission" would be a willful defiance of this legal framework.
ECI response
ECI denies rift; Singh terms it 'documented subversion'
The ECI has denied any rift among its members, claiming that the issues raised were operational queries and suggestions at the draft stage.
"They are a part of the decision-making process before a final decision is taken (unanimously)," the ECI said.
However, Singh argued that these disclosures indicated a "documented subversion" of constitutional machinery.
He contended that decisions allegedly taken by only one or two members couldn't be treated as internal administrative matters.
Legal proceedings
What SC judge said on CEC selection process
Notably, on the same day the report surfaced, Justice Dipankar Datta expressed doubts about the independence of the current selection process for the CEC and ECs under the 2023 law.
He said that a minister on the selection panel nominated by the prime minister cannot be expected to defy his own nominator since the collective responsibility doctrine prevents him from defying the PM.
"Inclusion of cabinet ministers fails to provide independent counterweight that a neutral selector would," Justice Datta said.