HUSSAIN VENGAD Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These writ petitions have been filed by Candidates/election agents raising apprehensions of threats and violence by the rival party workers on the days leading to the election to the Local Self Government Institutions in the State of Kerala. In these Writ Petitions filed on the eleventh hour, the petitioners bemoan that they are facing grave threats to life on their person. They assert that they would not be permitted to canvas for votes due to the incessant threats raised against them. In all these cases, the petitioners assert that their opponents, who owe allegiance to the party in power, would get support from the executive machinery of the State and neither them nor their party workers will be permitted to approach the voters and convince them in a free manner. They contend that there would be violence on polling day and there is a reasonable possibility of their booth agents as well as the voters being threatened and obstructed. According to them, if the atmosphere in and around the polling booth is not peaceful, it would prevent voters from venturing out and casting their vote. In some of the writ petitions, the petitioners contend that their constituency is politically very sensitive and there have been incidents of poll violence during the last elections. According to them, technology has progressed to such an extent that it is perfectly possible for the Election Commission to set up cameras in and around the polling booth and carry out webcasting which would dissuade the troublemakers from interfering with the election process. In some of the writ petitions, directions are sought to be issued to the Election Commission to ensure that impersonation of voters and casting of bogus votes are avoided. They also request that enough contingent of law enforcement officers be deployed to maintain peace and calm in and around the polling stations so that the voters can exercise their franchise and elect their person of choice.

(2.) In some of the writ petitions, the Election Commission has not been arrayed as a respondent as the prayer is only for police protection. In the cases wherein, the Election Commission has been arrayed as a respondent, statements have been filed narrating the steps taken by the Election Commission to ensure a transparent, fair and trouble free election. Since some of the candidates asserted that the booths are hypersensitive, the Election Commission was directed to file the list of booths that they have categorised as sensitive and hypersensitive. In the statement, which has been filed, it has been stated inter alia as follows:

(3.) Sri. Murali Purushothaman, the learned standing counsel submitted that out of total number of 34710 polling booths, 1800 polling booths have been identified as hypersensitive. In those polling booths, webcasting facilities have been arranged and the proceedings are webcasted live to the offices of the Election Commission, District Electoral Officer as well as the police authorities. The remaining 1100 polling booths have been identified as sensitive and in those booths, videography will be provided. In other polling booths which have not been identified as sensitive or hypersensitive, the Election Commission has made arrangements to provide accredited videographers whose services can be availed by the candidates or their election agent at the expense of the person who makes a request to the District Collector. It is further submitted that the Election Commission have issued directions to the State to deploy enough police personnel to ensure that no obstruction is caused to the voter or the candidate by any antisocial element. The Commission has been informed by the State that enough police personnel would be deployed to ensure a free and fair election. He would further state that the District Election Officers are the District Collectors themselves and they will be monitoring every stage of the election and if situation so warrants, additional police force, videography, webcasting etc. will be undertaken. The evaluation will be done on the basis of the vulnerability assessment and on the basis of the opinion of the election observers appointed in terms of Section 40A of the Kerala Panchayat Raj Act and 96A of the Municipality Act. He would further point out that as the voters will be permitted to vote only on the basis of the Election ID and as their name and photograph will be there in the voters slip issued by the Election Commission and hence, the chance of impersonation and bogus voting would be practically nonexistent.