New Delhi | The Supreme Court on Thursday refused to entertain a PIL seeking directions to make voting compulsory in the country, saying such a mandate falls within the "policy domain" and cannot be issued by the judiciary.
A bench comprising Chief Justice Surya Kant and justices Joymalya Bagchi and Vipul M Pancholi asked PIL petitioner Ajay Goel to approach the stakeholders with the grievances.
It said the pleas, seeking penal consequences for wilful non-voters and making the voting compulsory, cannot be dealt by the court. The petitioner also sought the issuance of guidelines to restrict government benefits for those who willfully abstain from voting.
During the proceedings, the CJI said democracy thrives on public awareness rather than legal coercion.
"In a country which is governed by the rule of law and believes in democracy, and where we have shown for 75 years how we trust and believe in it, everyone is expected to go (and vote). If they don't go, they don't go. What is needed is awareness, but we cannot compel," the CJI said.
Responding to the petitioner's suggestion that the court should direct the Election Commission to impose restrictions on government amenities for non-voters, the CJI questioned the logic of criminalising the act of staying home.
"Should we direct their arrest? If a citizen doesn't go for voting, what can we do," the CJI asked.
The bench referred to the practical difficulties of a mandatory voting law and said on election days, many citizens, including judges, are required to work.
"If we accept this, then my brother Justice Bagchi would have to go to West Bengal to vote even though it is a working day," the CJI said.
"Judicial work is also important," Justice Bagchi said.
The bench also expressed concern for the marginalised sections of society.
"If a person who is poor says, 'I need to earn my wages, how do I vote?' what should we say to them?" the bench asked.
The petitioner said the Election Commission should be directed to form a committee to propose restrictions on those who fail to exercise their franchise.
"We are afraid these issues lie in the policy domain," the CJI said.
