NEW DELHI: The Delhi High Court on Friday turned down a plea moved by BJP leader and lawyer Ashwini Kumar Upadhyay for compulsory voting in parliamentary and state Assembly elections to increase voter turnout and political participation.
A division bench of Chief Justice Satish Chandra Sharma and Justice Subramonium Prasad said that voting is a right and the choice of the people while hearing Upadyay’s Public Interest Litigation (PIL) petition.
“Which Article says that it is mandatory? I want to see it. Because we are not lawmakers,” the Chief Justice orally remarked. Asserting that voting is people’s choice, the bench said it is not possible for a person in Chennai to leave everything and to go for voting in Srinagar.
Further refusing to entertain the plea, the bench said if the plea is not withdrawn, it will impose costs, following which Upadhyay withdrew his plea. In the PIL, the petitioner contended that low voter turnout is a persistent problem in India. Compulsory voting can help to increase voter turnout, particularly among marginalized communities, it said.
The plea sought the court to direct the Centre and ECI to take apposite steps for compulsory voting in parliamentary and state Assembly elections, in order to enhance voter turnout, promote political participation, improve the quality of democracy and secure rights to vote in the spirit of the Supreme Court judgements. According to the plea, compulsory voting ensures that the elected representatives are chosen by a larger and more representative group of people.
This increases the legitimacy of the government and enhances the quality of democracy. When voter turnout is low, the government may not be representative of the people’s wishes, and this can lead to a lack of trust in the democratic process. Compulsory voting can help to ensure that the government is truly representative of the people.
It ensures that every citizen has a voice and that the government is representative of the people’s wishes. When voter turnout is high, the government is more accountable to the people and is more likely to act in their best interests, PIL said.
‘Voting is people’s choice’
Asserting that voting is people’s choice, the HC said it is not possible for a person in Chennai to leave everything and go for voting in Srinagar