Is the right to vote in India a statutory right or a constitutional right? Examine in light of Article 326 and the procedural safeguards on deleting voters from electoral rolls.

Article 326 makes adult suffrage the basis of elections to the Lok Sabha and State Assemblies [1]. The Representation of the People Act (RPA), 1950 puts that guarantee into practice through electoral rolls [2]. Courts have largely treated voting as a statutory right [3]. However, Justice Ujjal Bhuyan's recent public remarks against mass disenfranchisement have reopened the question [5]. The better view is a hybrid one.

Why courts call it a statutory right

• In Kuldip Nayar v. Union of India (2006), the Court held that the right to vote and to contest comes from statute, even though democracy is part of the basic structure [3].
• The rules on who can be registered and how are in the RPA 1950 and its Rules, not in the Constitution. These include citizenship, being 18 or older, and being "ordinarily resident" [2].
• Parliament fixes disqualifications by law, within the grounds Article 326 lists: non-residence, unsoundness of mind, crime, and corrupt or illegal practice [1].

Why Article 326 gives it a constitutional core

• Article 326 is mandatory. Elections "shall be on the basis of adult suffrage", so no law can narrow the franchise beyond the grounds it permits [1].
• In PUCL v. Union of India (2003), Justice P.V. Reddi said that voting, even if not a fundamental right, is "certainly a constitutional right" that originates in Article 326 [4].
• Free and fair elections are part of the basic structure. On this basis, Justice Bhuyan argued that arbitrary mass deletion would violate Articles 14 and 326 [5].

Procedural safeguards on deletion

• Section 22, RPA 1950: an entry can be corrected or deleted only after the person has had a reasonable opportunity of being heard. The one exception is death [2][5].
• Lal Babu Hussein v. ERO (1995) set out further safeguards [6]:
• an existing entry is presumed valid;
• the burden of proof lies on the objector;

• the officer must pass a reasoned speaking order and not rely only on police reports.

• Together these safeguards mean the statute is applied in a way that protects the constitutional guarantee.

In form, the right to vote is statutory. In substance, it rests on Article 326, which sets a floor that legislation can regulate but not lower. The way forward has three parts:

• a larger-bench ruling that settles the right's status;
• writing Lal Babu Hussein's safeguards into law for every roll revision;
• publishing deletion lists that people can appeal.

These steps would protect universal adult franchise and meet SDG 16.7's goal of inclusive, representative decision-making.