On April 17, 2025, the Supreme Court of India granted a two-week extension to both the Union Government and the Election Commission of India (ECI) for filing their response in a case challenging a recent amendment to the Conduct of Elections Rules, 1961. This amendment has come under scrutiny for restricting public access to CCTV footage and other records from polling stations.
The petition, filed by Rajya Sabha Member and Congress leader Jairam Ramesh, is a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) that contests the amendment made to Rule 93(2)(a) of the Conduct of Elections Rules. The petitioner argues that the change prohibits transparency by limiting public inspection of vital election-related documents, which were earlier accessible.\
Read Also:- SC Petition Challenges Telangana HC Verdict Upholding Termination of Law Officers After Government Change
The matter was heard by a bench comprising Chief Justice of India (CJI) Sanjiv Khanna and Justice Sanjay Kumar. During the hearing, Senior Advocate Maninder Singh, representing the Election Commission, requested additional time to file a reply. The bench accepted the request and allowed two more weeks for the response. It also permitted filing of a rejoinder if necessary.
An intervenor in the matter raised a significant concern, stating that the pendency of this petition before the Supreme Court could prevent High Courts from hearing similar writ petitions related to the same electoral amendment.
CJI Sanjiv Khanna addressed this concern, clarifying:
"We clarify that the pendency of the present petition will not have a bearing on writ petitions, if any, filed before the High Courts."
Read Also:- Possessing Psychotropic Substances Listed Under NDPS Act Is an Offence Even if Not Mentioned in NDPS Rules: SC
This clarification ensures that litigants across the country may still approach their respective High Courts without being affected by the Supreme Court's ongoing proceedings.
The PIL specifically targets the amendment to Rule 93(2)(a) concerning the production and inspection of election papers. Before the amendment, the rule broadly allowed for public inspection:
“All other papers relating to the election shall be open to public inspection.”
However, the amended version has narrowed the scope:
“All other papers as specified in these rules relating to the election shall be open to public inspection.”
This subtle change limits access only to documents expressly mentioned in the rules, thereby potentially excluding CCTV footage and other electoral records.
In an earlier hearing, Senior Advocate Abhishek Manu Singhvi, appearing on behalf of Jairam Ramesh, pointed out that the Union Government had stated in the media that the amendment was made to protect voter identity. However, Singhvi argued that:
“There has been no instance showing that the voter’s privacy was compromised prior to this amendment.”
The Handbook of the Returning Officer, 2023 further sheds light on the importance of these records. Specifically, Clause 19.10 of the handbook outlines procedures for storage and supply of essential election materials, including:
- CCTV footage from polling stations
- Copies of the result forms
- Supply of Form 17C (account of votes recorded per constituency)
Prior to the amendment, these materials were available for public inspection, reinforcing electoral transparency. The new restriction has, therefore, raised concerns about reduced public accountability in the election process.
The Supreme Court has listed the matter for further hearing in July 2025.
Case Title: Jaibram Ramesh vs Union of India and Another
Writ Petition (Civil) No. 18 of 2025
