Andhra civic polls face fresh scrutiny amid allegations of violence during nomination filing. (Img: X)
New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Wednesday directed the Andhra Pradesh State Election Commission (SEC) to defer publication of the final list of candidates for the upcoming urban local body elections until October 26, after the Yuvajana Sramika Rythu Congress Party (YSRCP) alleged that violence, intimidation and obstruction prevented several of its candidates from filing nomination papers.
A vacation bench comprising Justices Joymalya Bagchi and V. Mohana asked the state poll panel to examine complaints from YSRCP candidates and other affected contestants, assess the supporting material and decide by October 22 whether the nomination deadline should be extended in cases where candidates were allegedly prevented from submitting their papers due to law-and-order problems.
The final candidates’ list was originally scheduled for publication on October 21. The court’s intervention comes as the party led by former Andhra Pradesh Chief Minister Y. S. Jagan Mohan Reddy challenges the state High Court’s refusal to grant additional time for filing nominations.
The bench observed that the YSRCP had established a prima facie case warranting judicial intervention, particularly in view of the material placed before the court concerning alleged obstruction of candidates during the nomination process.
The court emphasised that filing nomination papers is a fundamental stage of electoral participation and that free and fair elections are central to constitutional democracy. It also made clear that judicial restraint in election matters does not prevent constitutional courts from intervening when credible concerns arise over law-and-order failures that could undermine the fairness of the electoral process.
At the same time, the bench refrained from taking over the Election Commission’s role in administering the polls. Instead, it directed the SEC to examine individual complaints on their merits and determine whether the circumstances justified an extension of the nomination period. If the commission decides to extend the deadline, the additional time must be at least 48 hours from the announcement of its decision, the court directed.
The Supreme Court directed the Andhra Pradesh Director General of Police (DGP) to ensure adequate police deployment and protection for candidates contesting the elections. The directions also cover election offices and nomination centres, where CCTV surveillance is to be provided to strengthen monitoring and accountability.
The court asked the state election machinery to take all necessary steps to address apprehensions among YSRCP candidates and other contestants regarding their ability to participate in the elections without intimidation or obstruction.
The SEC and the state authorities have been asked to submit compliance reports, with the matter scheduled for further hearing on October 27.
The directions place renewed focus on the responsibility of election authorities and the police to ensure that nomination procedures remain accessible to eligible candidates, irrespective of their political affiliation.
The YSRCP approached the Supreme Court after alleging that incidents of violence and intimidation on October 16, the first day of nominations, prevented its candidates from submitting their papers in several urban local bodies.
The party highlighted alleged incidents in Punganur, Rayachoti, Kadapa and Tirupati. According to its submissions, a candidate’s nomination papers were allegedly snatched and torn in Kadapa, while some candidates in Tirupati were reportedly assaulted and prevented from reaching nomination centres. Nine candidates from Tirupati are stated to have filed affidavits supporting allegations of obstruction.
During the hearing, senior advocate Maninder Singh, appearing for the YSRCP, claimed that approximately 63 per cent of the party’s candidates had been prevented from filing nominations across 19 urban local bodies. The party also referred to video recordings and other material that it said supported its allegations.
These claims remain allegations placed before the court; the commission has been tasked with assessing the evidence and determining whether individual candidates were genuinely prevented from filing their nominations.
## State Government and Election Commission Contest the Allegations
The Andhra Pradesh government and the State Election Commission opposed the YSRCP’s plea. Senior advocate Siddharth Luthra, representing the state, alleged that the petitioner party itself had been involved in instigating violence. The state’s counsel also argued that the allegations should not be accepted solely on the basis of claims made by one political side.
The SEC maintained that steps had already been taken to provide police protection and facilitate the nomination process. However, the bench questioned whether issuing general security directions was sufficient when complaints had already been raised about alleged violations on the ground.
The judges indicated that the effectiveness of the measures mattered as much as the directions themselves. The commission must therefore assess whether the safeguards actually worked and whether any candidate was prevented from exercising the right to contest.
The court also cautioned against allowing judicial proceedings to become platforms for political campaigning, while stressing that credible evidence of obstruction cannot be ignored when the fairness of an election is in question.
The YSRCP had first approached the Andhra Pradesh High Court on October 10, seeking additional nomination centres ahead of the urban local body elections. A single judge dismissed the plea on October 15.
The party subsequently sought an extension of the nomination deadline after raising allegations of violence and obstruction. On October 18, a division bench of the High Court rejected the request for a one-day extension, reasoning that reopening the nomination process after the deadline had expired would amount to interference with the election process.
Challenging that decision, the YSRCP argued before the Supreme Court that the expiry of the deadline could not itself be used to deny relief if candidates had allegedly been prevented from filing their papers before it closed.
The party sought an extension of the nomination period, additional centres equipped with videography, police protection for candidates and a stay on declarations of candidates elected unopposed. The publication of the final candidates’ list has been deferred until October 26, while the next Supreme Court hearing is scheduled for October 27.
