Challenge To Election Commissioners' Law: Live Updates From Supreme Court

LIVELAW NEWS NETWORK

7 May 2026 10:37 AM IST

Share this

Challenge To Election Commissioners Law: Live Updates From Supreme Court

Listen to this Article

The Supreme Court is hearing the petitions challenging the Chief Election Commissioner and Other Election Commissioners (Appointment, Conditions of Service and Term of Office) Act, 2023.

Bench : Justice Dipankar Datta and Justice Satish Chandra Sharma.

Yesterday, the Court rejected Centre's plea to adjourn the matter and began hearing arguments, orally observing that this case is more important than any other.

The petitioners have argued that the law violates constitutional principles affirmed by the Supreme Court in Anoop Baranwal v. UoI judgement, which provided for a selection panel comprising the Chief Justice of India apart from PM and LoP.

The petitioners contended that the impugned law ensures that "Prime Minister's man" is appointed, undermining independence and impartiality of the Election Commission.

Read report from yesterday's hearing here

Follow the page for live updates.

Live Updates

7 May 2026 11:42 AM IST
Hansaria resumes.
Hansaria cites TN Sheshan judgement, the second judges' case and the fourth judges' case.
Hansaria: independence of the election commission is as much important as independence of the judiciary.
7 May 2026 11:40 AM IST
J Datta: what do the Rules say?
Bhushan: it's a curable defect. we will correct it today itself.
7 May 2026 11:40 AM IST
J Datta: when the Supreme Court is approached or a decision on such an important issue we cannot simply say that very well we will go by substance. This will not set a very good example. Then don't have petitions, don't have verification, don't have evidence. This has been our major experience.
7 May 2026 11:38 AM IST
J Datta: we are not saying that we will not entertain on this ground but it has to be cured. This is not the way to verify. Somebody has to take responsibility for that statement
Bhushan: we will do it. I can say that everything stated in the petition is factually correct. The person who was supposed to verify passed away
7 May 2026 11:36 AM IST
Bhushan: it happens sometimes.
J Datta: this is our experience in the supreme court. It doesn't happen in the High Court. Yesterday we refused to adjourn saying that this is important and now this is what is happening
7 May 2026 11:36 AM IST
J Datta: come to play page 35 of of your petition see the verification part.
Bhushan: above named deponent verified. It is blank.
7 May 2026 11:34 AM IST
Bhushan: and there was no attempt it seems by the government to defend this. They just moved a resolution and in a voice vote it was passed.
7 May 2026 11:33 AM IST
Advocate Prashant Bhushan for Association for Democratic Reforms reads out pleading in ADR's writ petition: there was virtually no debate because a number of MPs were suspended. Mr. Owaisi had submitted strongly that this Act goes against Anoop Baranwal and make the appointment totally on subjective satisfaction of the government
7 May 2026 11:31 AM IST
Hansaria: Substantially it is that it has to be outside executive control.
J Datta: is it there on record that a number of MPs were out?
Farasat: in our intervention we have specifically pleaded this.
7 May 2026 11:30 AM IST
J Datta: Is there any petition with better pleadings? This is nothing. In an article 32 petition there is no specific pleading about invalidity of section 7 and 8 on the grounds which you are raising.
Farasat: ADR petition is much more detailed.

Next Updates Previous Updates

Challenge To Election Commissioners' Law: Live Updates From Supreme Court

LIVELAW NEWS NETWORK

Live Updates

Hansaria resumes. Hansaria cites TN Sheshan judgement, the second judges' case and the fourth judges' case. Hansaria: independence of the election commission is as much important as independence of the judiciary.

J Datta: what do the Rules say? Bhushan: it's a curable defect. we will correct it today itself.

J Datta: when the Supreme Court is approached or a decision on such an important issue we cannot simply say that very well we will go by substance. This will not set a very good example. Then don't have petitions, don't have verification, don't have evidence. This has been our major experience.

Bhushan: it happens sometimes. J Datta: this is our experience in the supreme court. It doesn't happen in the High Court. Yesterday we refused to adjourn saying that this is important and now this is what is happening

J Datta: come to play page 35 of of your petition see the verification part. Bhushan: above named deponent verified. It is blank.

Bhushan: and there was no attempt it seems by the government to defend this. They just moved a resolution and in a voice vote it was passed.

Hansaria: Substantially it is that it has to be outside executive control. J Datta: is it there on record that a number of MPs were out? Farasat: in our intervention we have specifically pleaded this.

J Datta: Is there any petition with better pleadings? This is nothing. In an article 32 petition there is no specific pleading about invalidity of section 7 and 8 on the grounds which you are raising. Farasat: ADR petition is much more detailed.

Tags

Hansaria resumes.
Hansaria cites TN Sheshan judgement, the second judges' case and the fourth judges' case.
Hansaria: independence of the election commission is as much important as independence of the judiciary.

J Datta: what do the Rules say?
Bhushan: it's a curable defect. we will correct it today itself.

Bhushan: it happens sometimes.
J Datta: this is our experience in the supreme court. It doesn't happen in the High Court. Yesterday we refused to adjourn saying that this is important and now this is what is happening

J Datta: come to play page 35 of of your petition see the verification part.
Bhushan: above named deponent verified. It is blank.

Hansaria: Substantially it is that it has to be outside executive control.
J Datta: is it there on record that a number of MPs were out?
Farasat: in our intervention we have specifically pleaded this.

J Datta: Is there any petition with better pleadings? This is nothing. In an article 32 petition there is no specific pleading about invalidity of section 7 and 8 on the grounds which you are raising.
Farasat: ADR petition is much more detailed.