Page 1

 REPORTABLE

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

CIVIL APPEAL NOS. 3040-3041 OF 2004    

The Chief Election Commissioner Etc.              …  Petitioners

Versus

Jan Chaukidar (Peoples Watch) & Ors.     …  Respondents

ORDER

These are appeals by way of Special Leave under Article  

136 of the Constitution against the common order dated  

30.04.2004 of the Patna High Court in C.W.J.C. No.4880 of  

2004 and C.W.J.C. No.4988 of 2004.  

2. The  facts  very  briefly  are  that  Article  326  of  the  

Constitution provides that the elections to the House of  

the People and to the Legislative Assembly of every State  

shall be on the basis of adult suffrage and every person  

who is a citizen of India and who is not less than eighteen  

years of age on such date as may be fixed in that behalf  

by or under any law made by the appropriate Legislature

Page 2

and is not otherwise disqualified under the Constitution or  

any  law  made  by  the  appropriate  Legislature  on  the  

grounds of non-residence, unsoundness of mind, crime or  

corrupt or illegal practice, shall be entitled to be registered  

as  a  voter  for  any  such  election.   In  accordance  with  

Article 326 of the Constitution, Parliament has enacted the  

Representation  of  the  People  Act,  1950  (for  short  ‘the  

1950 Act’) for registration of voters at such elections to  

the House of the People and to the Legislative Assembly of  

every State and has also enacted the Representation of  

the  People  Act,  1951  (for  short  ‘the  1951 Act’)  for  the  

conduct of elections to the Houses of Parliament and to  

the Houses of Legislature of each State.   

3. The  word  “elector”  is  defined  in  the  1951  Act  in  

relation to the constituency to mean a person whose name  

is entered in electoral rolls of the constituency for the time  

being  in  force  and  who  is  not  subject  to  any  of  the  

disqualifications mentioned in Section 16 of the 1950 Act.  

Section 16(1)(c) of the 1950 Act provides that a person  

shall be disqualified for registration in an electoral roll if he  

is  for  the time being disqualified from voting under the

Page 3

provisions  of  any  law  relating  to  corrupt  practices  and  

other offences in connection with elections.  

4. Section 4 of the 1951 Act lays down the qualifications  

for membership of the House of the People and one of the  

qualifications laid down is that he must be an “elector” for  

any Parliamentary constituency. Similarly, Section 5 of the  

1951 Act lays down the qualifications for membership of a  

Legislative  Assembly  of  a  State  and  one  of  the  

qualifications laid down is that he must be an “elector” for  

any Assembly constituency in that State.  Section 62 of  

the 1951 Act is titled “Right to vote” and it provides in  

sub-section (5) that no person shall vote at any election if  

he is confined in a prison, whether under a sentence of  

imprisonment or transportation or otherwise, or is in the  

lawful custody of the police.  The proviso to sub-section  

(5) of Section 62 of the 1951 Act, however, states that the  

sub-section  will  not  apply  to  a  person  subjected  to  

preventive detention under any law for the time being in  

force.  

Page 4

5. Writ petitions C.W.J.C. No.4880 of 2004 and C.W.J.C.  

No.4988  of  2004  were  filed  in  the  Patna  High  Court  

contending  that  a  person,  who  is  confined  in  prison,  

whether  under  a  sentence  of  imprisonment  or  

transportation or otherwise, or is in the lawful custody of  

the police is not entitled to vote by virtue of sub-section  

(5) of Section 62 of the 1951 Act and accordingly is not an  

“elector”  and  is,  therefore,  not  qualified  to  contest  

elections  to  the  House  of  People  or  the  Legislative  

Assembly of a State because of the provisions in Sections  

4 and 5 of the 1951 Act.  By the impugned common order,  

the  High  Court  accepted  this  contention  in  the  writ  

petitions and held:

“A right to vote is a statutory right, the  Law  gives  it,  the  Law  takes  it  away.  Persons  convicted  of  crime  are  kept  away from elections to the Legislature,  whether  to  State  Legislature  or  Parliament,  and  all  other  public  elections.  The Court has no hesitation in  interpreting  the  Constitution  and  the  Laws  framed  under  it,  read  together,  that persons in the lawful custody of the  Police also will  not be voters,  in which  case, they will neither be electors.  The  Law temporarily takes away the power  of  such  persons  to  go  anywhere  near  the  election  scene.   To  vote  is  a  statutory  right.  It  is  privilege  to  vote,

Page 5

which privilege may be taken away.  In  that  case,  the  elector  would  not  be  qualified,  even  if  his  name  is  on  the  electoral rolls.  The name is not struck  off, but the qualification to be an elector  and  the  privilege  to  vote  when  in  the  lawful  custody  of  the  police  is  taken  away.”

6. Aggrieved,  by  the  findings  of  the  High  Court,  the  

appellants  have  filed  these  appeals.   We  have  heard  

learned counsel  for  the parties and we do not  find any  

infirmity in the findings of the High Court in the impugned  

common order that a person who has no right to vote by  

virtue of the provisions of sub-section (5) of Section 62 of  

the  1951  Act  is  not  an  elector  and  is  therefore  not  

qualified to contest the election to the House of the People  

or the Legislative Assembly of a State.

7. These civil  appeals  are  accordingly  dismissed.   No  

costs.

..……………..……………………….J.                                      (A. K. Patnaik)

             ...…………..………………………..J.

                            (Sudhansu Jyoti Mukhopadhaya)

Page 6

New Delhi, July 10, 2013.