Supreme Court verdict provides relief to civil society groups raising voter awareness

The Supreme Court on Monday, 2 November, 2026, clarified that election authorities do not hold a monopoly over voter awareness campaigns. The Court observed that activists engaging with local communities to encourage participation in elections cannot be accused of political bias.

A three-judge bench led by Chief Justice of India Surya Kant has quashed the order passed by the Rajasthan State Election Commission (SEC). Prior to the panchayat elections in the state, civil society groups were denied permission to reach out to voters. The State Election Commission had expressed suspicion that these activists were working "at the behest of others." The Commission's counsel also argued that the Election Commission itself is already conducting voter awareness campaigns.

Regarding this matter, Supreme Court Justice Joymalya Bagchi noted that the fact that the Election Commission is conducting these campaigns does not mean that no other authority can conduct such campaigns. He further added that if any corrupt activities are carried out by these civil society groups, the Commission can regulate them, but they cannot claim a monopoly over efforts to raise voter awareness.

Advocate Prashant Bhushan, representing petitioners such as Aruna Roy, argued that these initiatives taken by civil society groups were entirely in the public interest. However, they had to face prohibitory orders under Section 163 of the BNSS in the state. Bhushan stated that they are not more than 20 people. He argued that Section 163 should not be imposed before elections unless there is a breach of peace. He said they are merely saying that voters should not take bribes, as it could cause them trouble later. They are telling voters to participate in the Panchayat Raj elections in a free, fair, and dignified manner.

Advocate Prashant Bhushan further stated that the next phase of the election is scheduled to be held on 14-15 November. The petitioners had sought permission from the State Election Commission twice to conduct these campaigns, but it was directly refused. He termed the refusal of permission and the imposition of Section 163 on the pretext of elections being near as ridiculous. He reiterated that voter awareness campaigns are specifically designed to make people aware of key facts, such as using NOTA and not accepting money.