People's Union for Civil Liberties Case (2013)

Supreme Court Judgement:

• Rules 41(2) & (3) and 49-0 of the Conduct of Election Rules, 1961 were deemed ultra vires Section 128 of the Representation of the People Act, 1951, and Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution for violating the secrecy of voting.

• The Election Commission was directed to include a provision in the ballot papers/EVMs for a "None of the Above" (NOTA) option, allowing voters who choose not to vote for any candidate to exercise their right while maintaining secrecy.

• The Court justified its directions to protect the right not to vote under Section 79(d) and Rule 49-0, emphasizing the need to safeguard the secrecy of voters' choices.

• Providing a NOTA option in EVMs was considered essential to uphold the right of expression under Article 19(1)(a) and prevent discrimination.

• Article 19 guarantees individuals the right to express diverse views, and denying the option to cast a negative vote undermines this freedom and the liberty ensured in Article 21.

• Protecting the voter's identity and ensuring secrecy are crucial for free and fair elections, and any arbitrary distinction between voters who cast their vote and those who do not is violative of Article 14.

Impact of Judgement:

• The Election Commission implemented the provision for the "None of the Above" (NOTA) option in ballot papers/EVMs following the Supreme Court's judgement.

• NOTA was first introduced in the General Elections to State Legislative Assemblies of Chhattisgarh, Madhya Pradesh, Mizoram, NCT of Delhi, and Rajasthan in 2013.

• It continued to be available in subsequent elections, including the General Elections to State Legislative Assemblies of Andhra Pradesh, Arunachal Pradesh, Odisha, and Sikkim in 2014, along with the General Elections to the Sixteenth Lok Sabha (2014).