Lok Sabha polls | Madras High Court directs ECI to consider request for poll debate in Coimbatore

Madras High Court directs ECI to decide on debate by YouTube channel Chanakyaa in Coimbatore.

The Madras High Court on Friday, April 5, 2024, directed the Election Commission of India (ECI) to take a decision by 5 p.m. on Friday on a representation to be made by the management of YouTube channel, Chanakyaa, to conduct a debate (Pattimandram) titled ‘Kalam 2024’ at an indoor auditorium in Coimbatore on Sunday, April 7.

Chief Justice Sanjay V. Gangapurwala and Justice J. Sathya Narayana Prasad asked senior counsel V. Raghavachari to make sure the representation was filed within an hour to the Chief Electoral Officer (CEO) who, in turn, was directed to forward it to the ECI forthwith for taking necessary action by the end of the day.

The orders were passed after ECI counsel Niranjan Rajagopalan told the court that the representation made on April 1 was rejected by the Coimbatore District Election Officer on April 4, on the basis of an adverse police report, and hence, the petitioner would have to now file a fresh representation to the commission.

The petitioner said the organisation had decided to conduct a debate about the 2024 Lok Sabha polls at an indoor auditorium in Nehru Nagar in Coimbatore city. A representation in this regard was made to the Coimbatore DEO as well as the Inspector of Peelamedu police station on April 1, seeking permission and police protection for the event scheduled to be held on April 7. However, the DEO and Inspector had not passed any orders on the representations, the petitioner claimed and said, such inaction sets a dangerous precedent for media freedom and democratic values.

Impleading the Chief Electoral Officer too as a respondent, the deponent said: “It is an irony that the respondents exhibit total ignorance on disbursement of money by a political party to the people and attempt to prevent a decent debate on current events.”

He went on to state: “The second respondent (DEO) is expected to act unbiasedly. Instead, one political party gets permission for an asking and the rest are prevented or kept guessing... I am ready to abide by any condition prescribed by this court.”