Published Oct 27, 2026 | 10:01 PM ⚊ Updated Oct 27, 2026 | 10:06 PM
Supreme Court
The Supreme Court on Tuesday, October 27, refused to interfere in the conduct of local body elections in Andhra Pradesh and directed the petitioners to approach tribunals after the polls. The court, however, issued guidelines, including monitoring of the polls using CCTV cameras.
A three-judge bench of the top court, headed by Chief Justice of India (CJI) Surya Kant and comprising Justice Joymalya Bagchi and Justice V. Mohana, declined to allow the postponement of the elections, stating that its earlier directives regarding the polls would remain in effect.
The court was hearing a petition filed by the Yuvajana Sramika Rythu Congress Party (YSRCP), alleging that its candidates were being prevented from participating in the elections.
After hearing arguments from both sides, the three-judge bench made it clear that the court could not intervene while the election process was underway. It observed that orders to halt the process could not be issued solely on the basis of speculative allegations and generalised statements.
The bench suggested that anyone with specific complaints about being prevented from filing nominations should approach the appropriate courts by filing election petitions, supported by relevant evidence, after the elections concluded. It clarified that election disputes must be resolved through the appropriate tribunals in accordance with the law.
Given the possibility that the disputes would be heard by election tribunals in the future, the bench ordered the State Election Commission to safely preserve CCTV footage recorded at nomination and polling centres.
Concluding the hearing, the court directed that the footage be preserved until the deadline for filing election petitions expired, allowing petitioners to use it as evidence in support of their claims.
Also Read: Nearly one crore voters struck off Karnataka’s voter list after SIR
Advocate Maninder Singh, appearing for the YSRCP, informed the court that, when the party filed its petition, candidates had been unable to file nominations for 63.57% of the seats in the local body elections. By the time of the latest hearing, he said, candidates had been unable to file nominations for 53% of the seats.
The YSRCP counsel argued that the situation had not changed despite the court’s earlier orders. He said that candidates had been prevented from filing nominations in urban local body polls and mandal-level elections. He also alleged that the state police had failed to protect the party’s candidates.
Arguing that the measures taken by the Election Commission (ECI) were merely nominal, the YSRCP counsel urged the court to intervene to ensure free and transparent elections and establish a robust mechanism to achieve this. The court declined these requests.
Lawyers appearing for the Andhra Pradesh government and the Election Commission rejected the YSRCP’s allegations. They said the Supreme Court’s orders had been implemented in full and explained that an additional deadline had been provided for candidates who had been unable to file nominations earlier.
Senior advocate Siddharth Luthra, appearing for the state government, and Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, representing the Election Commission, presented counterarguments to the petitioners’ claims.
They told the court that the Election Commission had responded promptly and taken action wherever specific complaints of obstruction in filing nominations had been received. Tushar Mehta explained that the nomination deadline had been extended in places where complaints had been received. He also said that around 120 candidates had been escorted from their homes to nomination centres under police protection.
He informed the bench that several candidates had filed nominations after the deadline was extended and that the situation was being reviewed continuously.
(Edited by Fayisa CA)
