On Wednesday, the Bombay High Court issued a directive to the Election Commission of India (ECI), compelling them to organize a bye-election for the vacant Pune Lok Sabha constituency. The seat had remained unoccupied since the passing of MP Girish Bapat on March 29, 2023. Justices GS Patel and Kamal Khata, constituting the division bench, criticized the ECI's rationale for not conducting the by-election, citing the organization's purported busyness with preparations for the 2024 Lok Sabha elections since March 2023.
The court underscored the essence of parliamentary democracy, emphasizing that elected representatives serve as the voice of the people. In the absence of a representative, a replacement must promptly take their place to prevent constituents from going unrepresented. The court deemed such a situation unconstitutional and fundamentally contrary to the constitutional structure of the nation.
The judicial rebuke extended to the quashing of the ECI's certificate, which asserted that bye-elections would not be feasible due to the ECI's preoccupation with preparing for the 2024 General Elections. The court found this reasoning untenable and stressed that a constituency cannot remain unrepresented for an indefinite period. It rejected the argument that the elected candidate in the bye-election would have a brief tenure, emphasizing the obligation to ensure representation within defined time frames.
Sughosh Joshi, a registered voter in the Pune Constituency, initiated the legal challenge against the ECI's certificate issued on August 23, 2023, under Section 151A of the Representation of People Act (RP Act). The petitioner contended that once a parliamentary seat becomes vacant, the mandate requires prompt notification and conduct of a bye-election. The court noted the Lok Sabha Secretary's confirmation of the vacancy since March 29, 2023, while the current Lok Sabha term was set to conclude on June 16, 2024.
The court dismissed the ECI's claim that organizing a bye-election was challenging, emphasizing the statutory obligation to prevent constituencies from remaining unrepresented for prolonged periods. It noted the inconsistency in the ECI's stance, pointing out that by-elections had been conducted for other legislative and Lok Sabha constituencies since the Pune seat became vacant. The court stressed that the relevant date for considering the by-election is the date of the vacancy, leaving no room for ambiguity.
Regarding the ECI's certificate, the court highlighted two problematic aspects. Firstly, it invalidated the consideration that the returned candidate would have a short tenure, asserting that the ECI should not adopt a sliding scale and that effectiveness in the remaining term should not be a concern. Secondly, the court deemed the ECI's claim of being too busy to conduct the by-election as bordering on the bizarre, emphasizing that administrative inconvenience cannot undermine the statutory obligation to hold an election.
The court questioned the ECI's swift consultation with the Central Government before issuing the certificate, pointing out that the entire process was completed in a single day. It emphasized that such consultations should involve deliberation on why no action had been taken since March 29. The court found it peculiar and raised concerns about the extraordinary dispatch of the consultation process.
Concluding its scrutiny, the court asserted that the certificate, indicating the non-conduct of a bye-election, is not a private communication but an intimation to the electorate that statutory reasons exist for them to continue being unrepresented. Consequently, the court allowed the writ petition, ruling in favor of the petitioner and directing the ECI to conduct the bye-election for the Pune Lok Sabha constituency.
TAGS: Bombay High Court Election Commission of India bye-election Pune Lok Sabha constituency MP Girish Bapat
