RAVI M Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioner, a Non-Resident Indian presently residing in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia has presented this social action litigation with a prayer scripted as under:

(2.) Learned counsel appearing for the Petitioner argues that India being a democratic polity, periodic elections do take place and therefore, a large chunk of citizens residing in several foreign countries, as NRIs cannot be excluded from the democratic process; right to vote in the elections to the Parliament and State Legislatures should be made available to the NRIs. He hastens to add that with the advanced Science and Technology, such a facility can be provided disregarding whatever arguable difficulties the Election Commission of India may have.

(3.) Sri M N Kumar, on request to accepts notice for the 1st Respondent - Union of India; Sri S.R. Dodawad, learned counsel appears for 2nd Respondent - Election Commission of India and the 4th Respondent - Chief Electoral Officer. Learned AAG Sri Subramanya R appears for the 3rd Respondent - State of Karnataka. It is submitted on behalf of the Respondents that: the right to vote is a creature of law; in the absence of such a right is shown to have been created by law, prayer of the kind cannot be granted; to whom right to vote should be accorded is a matter of statutory policy and therefore, Writ Courts cannot intervene in the matter. They also highlight the possible difficulties of such a right being granted to the NRIs, whilst on foreign soil.