Supreme Court Issues Notice To Union, ECI On ADR's Plea Challenging Lifelong Immunity To CEC, Election Commissioners

The plea seeks revival of proceedings against current and past CEC/Election Commissioners.

Update: 2026-10-13 10:20 GMT

Click the Play button to listen to article

The Supreme Court today issued notice on a petition filed by the Association for Democratic Reforms challenging the immunity granted to Chief Election Commissioner/Election Commissioners for actions taken in purported discharge of official duties.

A bench of CJI Surya Kant, Justice Joymalya Bagchi and Justice V Mohana sought the response of the Union and the Election Commission on ADR's challenge to the constitutional validity of Section 16 of the Chief Election Commissioner and Other Election Commissioners (Appointment, Conditions of Service and Term of Office) Act, 2023.

Senior Advocate Gopal Sankaranarayanan appeared for ADR. The petition has been filed through AoR Rani Mishra.

Briefly put, the petition seeks a declaration that Section 16 of the CEC Act is unconstitutional, void and inoperative as violative of Articles 14 and 21 and the basic structure of the Constitution. It further seeks revival of proceedings against the present and past CEC and Election Commissioners, which came to an end as Section 16 of the CEC Act came into effect.

Section 16 states as follows:

"Notwithstanding anything contained in any other law for the time being in force, no Court shall entertain or continue any civil or criminal proceedings against any person who is or was a Chief Election Commissioner or an Election Commissioner for any act, thing or word, committed, done or spoken by him when, or in the course of acting or purporting to act in the discharge of his official duty or function."

The petition contends that Section 16 provides blanket immunity to the current and previous CEC/ECs for lifetime, which has no rational nexus with the objective of ensuring independence of CEC/ECs. The provision places the CEC & ECs beyond the reach of any Court of law, it highlights.

"No other provision in the Constitution of India or any statute grants immunity that is at once lifelong, unconditioned by good faith, free of any sanction mechanism, and without a saving clause."

Petitioner-ADR further points out that Section 16 was not originally part of the Bill introduced. It was inserted and voted upon at a time when a substantial number of Members of Parliament from Opposition were under suspension. Thus, its insertion in the Act suffers impropriety.

"The provision was proposed for the first time as new clause 15A through an official amendment circulated on 11.12.2023 and was disclosed to the Rajya Sabha on 12.12.2023. It received no debate in that House, and the only reason recorded for it was that it would enable the CEC and ECs to discharge their functions independently. On the same day, the motions to refer the Bill to a Select Committee were negatived, and the Bill was passed.

On the other hand, in Lok Sabha, on 21.12.2023, the sole objection to the immunity went unanswered, and members supporting the Bill described the protection as confined to the tenure of office. The Bill was passed without any amendment. More importantly, the Bill accompanied by the amendment was passed by the Parliament when a substantial number of Members of Parliament from the Opposition were under suspension."

It is also contended that only CEC/ECs enjoy such "drastic" blanket protection, and no other Constitutional functionary, such as the President, Governor of a State, or judges, enjoy such immunity when they demit office. Therefore, such a blanket protection is without any "intelligible differentia" distinguishing CEC/ECs from other constitutional functionaries or statutory authorities.

The petitioner submits that between 1950 and 2023, independent status of CEC/ECs was guaranteed by the Constitution and therefore, there was no need for the provision. Relying on Subramanian Swamy v. CBI, it is averred that any classification based on status or position of an officer or a public servant for the purposes of inquiry/ investigation is impermissible under Article 14.

A similar petition filed by NGO-Lok Prahari, challenging blanket immunity to CEC/Election Commissioners, is pending before the Court. The present case has been directed to be tagged with the Lok Prahari case.