The Delhi High Court ordered the Election Commission of India (ECI) to ensure that political parties strictly abide by the regulations on the COVID-19 requirements during elections.
In the instant case titled Dr Vikram Singh v. Union of India & Anr., the issue raised before the Delhi High Court was:
Parties should be banned if mandatory masking guidelines are not followed.
With regard to the issue, the court dismissed a PIL that asked for a ban on political party and candidate campaigning during elections, "either indefinitely or for a defined length of time," if they regularly disobey the Election Commission's required masking regulations.
The attorney representing ECI argued that the company had periodically taken harsh action in the matter against all transgressors and had also issued recommendations in that regard. The attorney further informed the court that there is currently no COVID-19 pandemic crisis in the nation and that the Commission is assuring strict adherence to the guidelines issued on the matter.
Political leaders, campaigners, and candidates who do not don masks during the election process are interfering with every person's fundamental right to life. When the Election Commission orders that masks must be worn, it has a responsibility to ensure that the order is strictly followed. The petition said that failing to wear a mask attracts punishment as well as criminal prosecution.
The court categorically stated that:
“Article 324 of the Constitution grants the Election Commission broad authority to carry out its directives. In order to ensure that required masking is effectively observed by everyone throughout the election season, the Petitioner filed a representation to the Commission on March 11, 2021, requesting that it take stern action against prominent campaigners from various political parties. If they regularly break the necessary masking rules, the petitioner asked that the Election commission ban such campaigners and candidates from running in the election "either permanently or for a predetermined, suitably long period."
Hence, the court dismissed the petition.