Once underway, poll process immune from judicial interference, rules HC
The Punjab and Haryana High Court has dismissed a bunch of petitions challenging the delimitation of municipal corporation wards after making it clear that the election process is immune from judicial interference once commenced.
Move Election Tribunal
- The Division Bench reiterated that judicial intervention during the poll process would violate the constitutional principles
- Such disputes were required to be raised only through election petitions before the Election Tribunal after the declaration of results
- The court also noted that any alleged irregularities were required to be addressed under the statutory framework post-election
The Bench ruled any grievance relating to irregularities during elections, including delimitation exercise, could not be entertained once the election schedule was announced. Such disputes were required to be raised only through election petitions before the Election Tribunal after the declaration of results.
“The state counsel has also placed on record a copy of the order dated December 8 by the State Election Commission, Punjab, whereby the schedule for the elections to various municipal corporations, councils and nagar panchayats, in the State of Punjab has been announced. Therefore, the breaches, if any, to the rules (supra) by the competent authority in the latter making delimitation of wards also cannot undo the announced election programme,” the Bench added.
Referring to judgments by the Supreme Court in the matter of “NP Ponnuswami versus Returning Officer” and “Mohinder Singh Gill versus Chief Election Commissioner”, the Division Bench of Justice Sureshwar Thakur and Justice Sudeepti Sharma reiterated that judicial intervention during the election process would violate the constitutional principles of expeditious elections. The court held that delays could disrupt the democratic process and render elections ineffective.
The court also noted that any alleged irregularities were required to be addressed under the statutory framework post-election. Significance should not be attached to issues that did not affect the election process directly, the Bench observed, adding that even claims of disenfranchisement or flawed voter lists must be adjudicated by the Election Tribunal.
