Supreme Court PIL Seeks De-Registration of Congress Over ‘Vote-Chori’ Campaign Against Election Commission

Introduction

A fresh political-legal battle has reached the Supreme Court of India with a public interest litigation (PIL) seeking de-registration of the Indian National Congress (INC) over its recent “Vote-Chori” campaign. The petition, filed by Satish Kumar Aggarwal, ex-Vice President of Akhil Bharat Hindu Mahasabha, targets senior Congress leaders Rahul Gandhi and Mallikarjun Kharge, alleging that their remarks and campaigns against the Election Commission of India (ECI) undermine the credibility of a constitutional authority. The plea not only seeks cancellation of the party’s registration but also demands the constitution of a Special Investigation Team (SIT) to probe the campaign.

This development comes at a crucial time when issues concerning the Bihar Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of the voter list are already pending before the Supreme Court. The case has stirred a nationwide debate on the limits of free speech, political accountability, and the sanctity of democratic processes in India.

The Petitioner’s Demands

The PIL (titled Satish Kumar Aggarwal v. Union of India & Ors.) makes several strong demands:

1. De-registration of the Congress Party under the claim that its campaign violates its oath of allegiance to the Constitution.
2. Ex-parte ad-interim stay to restrain Congress, Rahul Gandhi, Mallikarjun Kharge, their agents, and representatives from making speeches, campaigns, or publications that allegedly tarnish the authority and impartiality of the ECI.
3. Constitution of an SIT to probe allegations against Congress leaders regarding the “Vote-Chori” campaign.
4. A declaration that political parties cannot malign the ECI while cases relating to electoral rolls are pending before the Court.

The Controversial “Vote-Chori” Campaign

Rahul Gandhi and Mallikarjun Kharge have been spearheading a political campaign under the banner of “Vote-Chori” (alleged voter list manipulation), accusing the Election Commission of colluding with the ruling government to alter or inflate voter lists. According to the petitioner, this amounts to a direct attack on the constitutional sanctity of the ECI.

The plea highlights that at the time of its registration, the INC had sworn allegiance to the Constitution of India. However, by branding the Election Commission as “Vote-Chor”, the party and its leaders are accused of breaching this oath.

The petition also points out that since the Bihar voter list revision issue is already sub-judice before the Supreme Court, Congress leaders should refrain from public campaigns that prejudge the matter. The petitioner has particularly noted that KC Venugopal, a Congress MP, is already a petitioner in the Bihar SIR case.

Allegations of Breach of Parliamentary Oath

The petitioner further contends that both Rahul Gandhi and Mallikarjun Kharge have breached their oaths as Members of Parliament by undermining a constitutional authority. The plea notes:

• Using the term “Vote-Chor” for the ECI is disrespectful and unconstitutional.
• Accusations of collusion between the ECI and the Central Government, while a matter is pending before the Court, shows disregard for judicial authority.
• Such actions erode public trust in free and fair elections, a cornerstone of Indian democracy.

Impact on Chief Election Commissioner’s Reputation

Another critical aspect raised is that the “Vote-Chori” campaign has maligned the image of Chief Election Commissioner (CEC) Gyanesh Kumar. The petition alleges that the INC and its leaders used “unparliamentary words” against the CEC in both print and electronic media, thereby lowering the dignity of the office.

Related Developments

Interestingly, this is not the only petition linked to allegations of voter list manipulation. Another PIL has been filed by an advocate seeking an SIT headed by a former Supreme Court Judge to probe Rahul Gandhi’s allegations of large-scale voter list tampering in Bengaluru Central constituency during the 2024 Lok Sabha elections. This indicates that voter list transparency is emerging as a recurring theme in electoral litigation.

Legal Issues Raised in the PIL

The PIL raises multiple legal and constitutional questions, such as:

1. Can a political party be de-registered for making remarks against a constitutional authority?

• Under Section 29A of the Representation of the People Act, 1951, political parties must swear allegiance to the Constitution. A violation may give grounds for de-registration, but historically, courts have been cautious in ordering such an extreme step.

1. Does free speech cover political campaigns that criticize constitutional bodies?

• Article 19(1)(a) guarantees free speech, but reasonable restrictions exist in the interests of public order and sovereignty. The case could test the limits of political criticism versus defamation of a constitutional authority.

1. Can ongoing judicial proceedings restrict political expression?

• The petitioner argues that since the Bihar voter list issue is sub-judice, Congress leaders should not run campaigns on the same. The Court will have to examine if this amounts to contempt of court or undue influence over pending proceedings.

1. Oath of Office and Constitutional Responsibility

• Whether derogatory remarks against ECI can amount to breach of the oath taken by MPs to uphold the Constitution.

Possible Outcomes

The Supreme Court has yet to issue notice or pass interim directions in this matter, but potential outcomes could include:

• Issuance of Interim Gag Orders: The Court may temporarily restrict political leaders from using terms like “Vote-Chori” in campaigns until the case is decided.
• Dismissal of the PIL: If found politically motivated or lacking legal grounds, the Court may reject the petition, consistent with its stance against misuse of PILs.
• Direction for SIT/Inquiry: The Court could appoint a neutral committee or SIT to examine allegations of voter list tampering, especially since similar pleas are pending.
• Clarification on Free Speech vs. Constitutional Authority: This case may set important precedent on the limits of political speech when directed at constitutional institutions.

Broader Implications for Indian Democracy

This PIL is not merely about one political party. Its outcome could reshape the contours of electoral politics in India:

• If the Court tightens restrictions, political parties may have to exercise greater caution in election campaigns.
• If the Court dismisses the PIL, it could reinforce freedom of political speech, even if it is critical of institutions.
• It also highlights the increasing use of judicial forums for political accountability, with PILs being a preferred tool to challenge campaigns.

Conclusion

The Supreme Court PIL against the Congress’s “Vote-Chori” campaign is poised to be a significant case in the ongoing tug-of-war between political free speech and the protection of constitutional institutions. While the petitioner seeks harsh measures like de-registration of the INC, the Court will likely balance the principles of democracy, free expression, and institutional respect.

Whatever the outcome, the case underlines the fragile yet vital relationship between politics and constitutional bodies in India’s democracy. With related voter list manipulation cases also pending, the Court’s rulings in the coming months will play a pivotal role in defining the future of electoral discourse in India.

Also Read

Supreme Court Allows Visually Challenged CLAT-PG Candidates to Answer on Computers: A Step Towards Inclusive Legal Education

Bombay High Court to Watch Movie Ajey on Yogi Adityanath Before Deciding Censorship Row