DAILY CURRENT AFFAIRS IAS | UPSC Prelims and Mains Exam – 25th January 2025
Archives (PRELIMS & MAINS Focus) NATIONAL VOTERS’ DAY Syllabus: Prelims & Mains – CURRENT EVENT Context: January 25 is celebrated annually as National Voters’ Day to mark the foundation day of the Election Commission of India (ECI), which was founded on January 25, 1950. Background: – This year we are celebrating the 15th National Voters’ Day with the theme “Nothing Like Voting, I Vote for Sure” emphasising the importance of participation in the electoral process, and encouraging voters to take pride in exercising their franchise. Key things to know about elections In democracies, voting is seen as a basic exercise that shows people’s faith in the political process. Voting is a crucial part of exercising one’s citizenship. In 2013, the Indian Supreme Court allowed for the option ‘None of the Above’ to be introduced in Lok Sabha and state Legislative Assembly elections to allow such views to be expressed. “Not allowing a person to cast a vote negatively defeats the very freedom of expression and the right ensured in Article 21, i.e. the right to liberty… a provision of negative voting would be in the interest of promoting democracy as it would send clear signals to political parties and their candidates as to what the electorate think about them. The mechanism of negative voting, thus, serves a very fundamental and essential part of a vibrant democracy,” the court said at the time. Postal Ballots ‘Postal ballot’ allows voters who cannot be physically present in polling stations to vote remotely, as specified in Section 60 of the RPA. As per Rule 18 of The Conduct of Election Rules, 1961, the following classes of persons are entitled to vote by postal ballot: Special voters: Individuals holding declared office under Section 20(4) of RPA, including the President, Vice President, Governors, Cabinet Ministers, other high-ranking dignitaries, etc. and their spouses. Service voters: Members of the Indian armed forces, paramilitary forces, an armed state police member serving outside their state, or a government employee stationed abroad and their spouses residing with them. Voters on election duty: This includes all Commission’s observers, presiding officers, polling officers and agents, police personnel, and public servants assigned official tasks on polling day. Private individuals and non-government staff, such as videographers, control room staff, drivers, conductors, cleaners, helpline staff, etc., are also covered. Electors subjected to preventive detention Absentee voters under Section 60 (c) of RPA, 1951: In 2019, the Election Commission created the ‘Absentee Voters’ category. This includes senior citizens aged 85+, persons with disabilities having at least 40% disability, Covid-19 suspect or affected persons, and persons employed in essential services. Source: Indian Express ESSENTIAL RELIGIOUS PRACTICES DOCTRINE Syllabus: Prelims & Mains – POLITY Context: Observing that use of loudspeakers is not essential part of any religion, the Bombay High Court directed the Maharashtra government to have an in-built mechanism to control decibel levels in loudspeakers, public address system (PAS) or any other sound-emitting gadgets used at places of worship, or institutions, irrespective of religion. Background: – The court passed these directives on a plea alleging failure to take action against use of loudspeakers and amplifiers by religious places beyond prohibited hours and permissible decibel limits. Key takeaways The court referred to the 2016 HC judgement that issued several directives for the strict implementation of Noise Pollution (Regulations and Control) Rules, 2000. The HC in 2016 observed that “use of loudspeakers is not an essential part of any religion and therefore protection under Article 25 (freedom of religion) of constitution is not available” to violating institutions. The doctrine of “essentiality” was invented by a seven-judge Bench of the Supreme Court in the ‘Shirur Mutt’ case in 1954. The court held that the term “religion” will cover all rituals and practices “integral” to a religion, and took upon itself the responsibility of determining the essential and non-essential practices of a religion. The ‘essentiality doctrine’ of the Supreme Court has been criticised by several constitutional experts. Scholars of constitutional law have argued that the essentiality/integrality doctrine has tended to lead the court into an area that is beyond its competence, and given judges the power to decide purely religious questions. As a result, over the years, courts have been inconsistent on this question — in some cases they have relied on religious texts to determine essentiality, in others on the empirical behaviour of followers, and in yet others, based on whether the practice existed at the time the religion originated. Freedom of religion was meant to guarantee freedom to practice one’s beliefs based on the concept of “inward association” of man with God. The apex court in ‘Ratilal Panachand Gandhi vs The State of Bombay and Ors’ (March 18, 1954) acknowledged that “every person has a fundamental right to entertain such religious beliefs as may be approved by his judgment or conscience”. Scholars have argued that the essentiality test impinges on this autonomy. The apex court has itself emphasised autonomy and choice in its Privacy (2017), 377 (2018), and Adultery (2018) judgments. Source: Indian Express AD HOC JUDGES IN HIGH COURTS Syllabus: Prelims & Mains – POLITY Context: Recently, the Supreme Court suggested temporarily appointing retired judges on an ad hoc (as required) basis to address the growing backlog of pending criminal cases before several High Courts. Background: In 2021, the SC noted there have only been three recorded instances of ad hoc judges being appointed under Article 224A, calling it a “dormant provision”. Key takeaways Article 224A of the Indian Constitution allows the Chief Justice of a High Court to request retired HC judges to perform the duties of a judge again, with the permission of the President of India. Such appointees are entitled to allowances as determined by the President’s order and have all the jurisdiction, powers and privileges of a Judge of that High Court. However, they cannot be “deemed” as such. Further, both the retired judge and the President of India are required to consent to the appointment. The detailed procedure can be found in the 1998 Memorandum of Procedure (MOP) for the appointment of High Court judges, prepared following
DAILY CURRENT AFFAIRS IAS | UPSC Prelims and Mains Exam – 25th January 2025 Read More »
