A Supreme Court bench gave a split verdict on pleas challenging a 2023 law that excludes the Chief Justice of India from the panel selecting the Chief Election Commissioner and Election Commissioners. One judge questioned the appointment mechanism's neutrality, while the other backed sending the issue to a larger bench.

Justices Dipankar Datta and Satish Chandra Sharma heard a batch of pleas challenging the validity of the 2023 law on appointments to the Election Commission of India. The bench delivered a split verdict on Wednesday.
Justice Datta said the Election Commission must not only be independent but also be seen to act independently to ensure free and fair elections. He questioned the neutrality of the appointment mechanism, observing that a Union Cabinet minister nominated by the prime minister could not be expected to oppose the prime minister during the selection process. He flagged the risk of executive control under the law.
Justice Sharma called the issue important and backed referring the pleas to a larger bench.
A Supreme Court bench gave a split verdict on pleas challenging a 2023 law that excludes the Chief Justice of India from the panel selecting the Chief Election Commissioner and Election Commissioners. One judge questioned the appointment mechanism's neutrality, while the other backed sending the issue to a larger bench.

Justices Dipankar Datta and Satish Chandra Sharma heard a batch of pleas challenging the validity of the 2023 law on appointments to the Election Commission of India. The bench delivered a split verdict on Wednesday.
Justice Datta said the Election Commission must not only be independent but also be seen to act independently to ensure free and fair elections. He questioned the neutrality of the appointment mechanism, observing that a Union Cabinet minister nominated by the prime minister could not be expected to oppose the prime minister during the selection process. He flagged the risk of executive control under the law.
Justice Sharma called the issue important and backed referring the pleas to a larger bench.