Any process disenfranchising millions of Indians intrinsically arbitrary: SC judge Ujjal Bhuyan
Supreme Court judge Justice Ujjal Bhuyan on Sunday said any process that results in the wholesale disenfranchisement of millions of Indian citizens would be "intrinsically arbitrary" and a negation of the constitutional order, asserting that no one was above the Constitution.
Delivering the valedictory address at the 19th Justice Bodh Raj Sawhney Memorial Moot Court Competition at NALSAR University of Law, Bhuyan said the Constitution did not envisage two classes of citizens -- those with voting rights and those without them.
He said a process that deprived large numbers of citizens of their right to vote would violate Articles 326 and 14 of the Constitution.
"If any process results in disenfranchising millions and millions of Indian citizens making them second class citizens in their own country in the sense of being citizens without a voting right, such a process is intrinsically arbitrary. No amount of whataboutery can justify it," he said.
"It strikes at the very heart of the Constitution and I would go to the extent of saying that it is a negation of the Constitutional order which we have adopted based under Constitution of India," he said.
Bhuyan said the right to vote was intertwined with India's long struggle against foreign rule and represented the freedom achieved through that struggle and sacrifice.
"Article 326 cannot be tinkered with at all. No authority can do it; no court can endorse it or condone it. No one is above the Constitution," he said.
The judge said the right to vote was not merely a statutory right arising from parliamentary legislation such as the Representation of the People Act, 1951, but a constitutional right forming a distinct part of democracy and falling within the framework of the Constitution's basic structure.
Citing a Supreme Court order, Bhuyan said the apex court had observed that a citizen's right to vote could not be divorced from the mandate of Article 326 and that the right to be a voter and participate in elections was fundamental to free and fair polls.
He also referred to Section 22 of the Representation of the People Act, which permits deletion of an entry from an electoral roll subject to safeguards, including giving the concerned voter a reasonable opportunity of being heard.
Citing another Supreme Court judgment, he said the court had laid down guidelines governing deletion of voters' names.
"Except in the case of a dead person, the name of a voter once enlisted in the electoral roll cannot be deleted without notice and hearing," Bhuyan said.
"From the persona of an Indian citizen, the right to vote or right to be included in the voters list cannot be detached. It will be like taking out the soul from the body," he said.
Bhuyan also cited US Supreme Court judge Justice Felix Frankfurter's observation on the central place of the citizen in a democracy.
He quoted Frankfurter as saying, "Democracy is always a beckoning goal, not a safe harbour; for freedom is an unremitting endeavour, never a final achievement."
"I ask myself, what is the worth of a citizen without his/her voting rights," Bhuyan said.
The judge, who served as Chancellor of NALSAR, also praised the university's students, faculty and Vice Chancellor Srikrishna Deva Rao.
He said the students had shown what a university student, particularly a law student, should be like, describing them as "brilliant", "bold" and "brave".
Bhuyan also commended the faculty for discharging their responsibilities and praised Deva Rao for leading the university admirably.
