Ex-CJI Chandrachud backs simultaneous polls: 'Staggered elections not feature of original Constitution'

This argument, he said, is based on the assumption that the Indian electorate is “naive” and can be easily “manipulated.”

Justice Chandrachud argues that this contention flies in the face of the universal adult franchise, which has been part of the Indian Constitution since its inception.

Further in his written submission, he said that, “staggered elections cannot be considered as a feature of the original Constitution, let alone an immutable feature.” The legislation “does not infringe” upon voters’ rights to choose their elected representatives, since the legislation allows for midterm polls in case any State Assembly is dissolved, for various reasons, he said.

Several previous speakers who had met with the panel earlier identified various issues with the proposed legislations, reported The Hindu, citing sources.

In February, former Chief Justice UU Lalit informed the panel that the Bill, in its current form, would likely not withstand a legal challenge in the Supreme Court. He expressed his concern that reducing the tenure of certain State assemblies to synchronise elections would violate the basic structure of the Constitution, as protected by the Kesavananda Bharati judgment.

In March, another former Chief Justice, Ranjan Gogoi, cautioned that granting the Election Commission unrestricted authority to determine the schedule for simultaneous elections would not be advisable, according to sources.

Justice Chandrachud has also noted that the worry about simultaneous elections potentially marginalising smaller or regional parties—due to the overwhelming resources of national parties—deserves legislative attention. However, he emphasised that this issue exists independently of the proposed simultaneous elections legislation.

On the same day that Justice Chandrachud shares his insights, the panel will also meet with senior advocate E.M. Sudarsana Natchiappan and former Union Minister M Veerappa Moily.