Delhi HC dismisses plea seeking voting rights for prisoners

Panel refers to a 1997 judgment of the Supreme Court, that any person confined in prison while serving a sentence or is in lawful confinement in a prison or in a police custody is not entitled to vote in an election

February 12, 2020 12:41 pm | Updated 12:45 pm IST - New Delhi

Representational image. | File

Representational image. | File

The Delhi High Court has dismissed a PIL seeking voting rights for prisoners, saying the facility was provided under the law and it can be taken away by law.

A Bench of Chief Justice D.N. Patel and Justice C. Hari Shankar said the Supreme Court has held that the right to cast vote was neither a fundamental right nor a common law right and was only provided by a statute.

The Bench noted the right to vote provided under the statute — Representation of the People Act — was subject to restrictions imposed by the law, which does not allow prisoners to cast vote from jails.

The High Court said in view of the apex court rulings and the statutory position, it saw no reason to entertain the plea, and dismissed it.

The decision came on a plea by three law students — Praveen Kumar Chaudhary, Atul Kumar Dubey and Prerna Singh — seeking voting rights for all persons lodged in jails across the country.

The petition challenged the constitutionality of Section 62(5) of the RP Act, which deprives prisoners of their right to vote.

The Election Commission opposed the plea , saying prisoners do not have voting rights under the Act and it has been upheld by the Supreme Court. The panel told the court the right to vote is a statutory right under Section 62 of the RP Act and “being a statutory right (it) is subject to restrictions prescribed in the RP Act“.

The panel referred to a 1997 judgment of the Supreme Court, which held that the effect of sub-section (5) of Section 62 of the Act is that any person confined in prison while serving a sentence or is in lawful confinement in a prison or in a police custody for any reason is not entitled to vote in an election.

But this restriction does not apply to a person subjected to any kind of preventive detention, the apex court judgment said.

0 / 0
Sign in to unlock member-only benefits!
  • Access 10 free stories every month
  • Save stories to read later
  • Access to comment on every story
  • Sign-up/manage your newsletter subscriptions with a single click
  • Get notified by email for early access to discounts & offers on our products
Sign in

Comments

Comments have to be in English, and in full sentences. They cannot be abusive or personal. Please abide by our community guidelines for posting your comments.

We have migrated to a new commenting platform. If you are already a registered user of The Hindu and logged in, you may continue to engage with our articles. If you do not have an account please register and login to post comments. Users can access their older comments by logging into their accounts on Vuukle.