CJI Surya Kant (IANS) NEW DELHI: Chief Justice of India Surya Kant on Friday stepped aside from hearing a batch of petitions that question the constitutional validity of the 2023 law governing the appointment of the chief election commissioner (CEC) and election commissioners, saying his presence on the bench could raise concerns of conflict of interest.”I will be accused of conflict of interest. There is a conflict of interest,” the CJI said at the beginning of the hearing, as quoted by PTI. He was part of a bench with Justices Joymalya Bagchi and Vipul M Pancholi. Watch ‘Unpromulgated President’s Rule’: Mamata Banerjee Attacks EC Over Mass Transfers Before Bengal Polls The petitions challenge provisions of the Chief Election Commissioner and Other Election Commissioners (Appointment, Conditions of Service and Term of Office) Act, 2023, which removed the Chief Justice of India from the selection panel for appointing the CEC and ECs. Israel Iran WarUS-Israel-Iran War News Live Updates: Israel pounds Tehran as Iranians mark Nowruz; UAE, Kuwait defences respond to missile barrage’World’s first hit’: Iran claims strike on US F-35 lightning 2 – why it’s a big dealIran hits Ras Laffan facility: Qatar’s 17% LNG capacity gone, $20bn loss; which countries will be impacted?According to the petitioners, this change weakens the independence of the appointment process.The issue stems from a March 2023 ruling by a five-judge constitution bench, which held that the CEC and election commissioners should be appointed on the recommendation of a panel made up of the prime minister, the leader of the opposition in the Lok Sabha and the chief justice of India. The court had said this arrangement would continue until Parliament brought in a law.Parliament later passed the 2023 law in December that year. Under this law, the selection committee includes the prime minister, a Union minister chosen by the prime minister, and the leader of Opposition, or the leader of the largest opposition party in the Lok Sabha.Several petitioners have challenged the law, including Congress leader Jaya Thakur and the Association for Democratic Reforms.While recusing himself, the CJI said the matter should go before a bench in which no judge is in line to become the chief justice. Senior advocate Prashant Bhushan, appearing for one of the petitioners, agreed with the suggestion and said that would remove any possible impression of bias.”I personally don’t have any problem, but it can be listed before a bench not having a prospective CJI,” Bhushan said.The CJI then directed that the matter be listed before another bench on April 7 and indicated that the new bench would be made up of judges who are not in line to hold the office of the Chief Justice of India.The Centre has earlier defended the appointment of two new election commissioners under the 2023 law, arguing in the Supreme Court that the Election Commission’s independence does not depend on the inclusion of a judicial member in the selection committee.In an affidavit, the Union Law Ministry also rejected the petitioners’ allegation that the appointments made on March 14, 2024, were rushed through to “pre-empt” any order the apex court might pass the next day, when the petitions were scheduled to be heard on interim relief.The Supreme Court had earlier declined to stay the appointment of the new election commissioners under the 2023 law.About the AuthorTOI News DeskThe TOI News Desk comprises a dedicated and tireless team of journalists who operate around the clock to deliver the most current and comprehensive news and updates to the readers of The Times of India worldwide. With an unwavering commitment to excellence in journalism, our team is at the forefront of gathering, verifying, and presenting breaking news, in-depth analysis, and insightful reports on a wide range of topics. The TOI News Desk is your trusted source for staying informed and connected to the ever-evolving global landscape, ensuring that our readers are equipped with the latest developments that matter most.”Read MoreEnd of ArticleFollow Us On Social MediaVideos’The World Is Saying Only India Can Stop This War’: RSS Chief’s Big Statement On Peace And HarmonyPremium Petrol Prices Hiked By Up To ₹2.35 Per Litre In India Amid West Asia ConflictPakistan’s Fake War Narrative Exposed: India Busts Digital Attack After Iran’s IRIS Dena StrikeIndia Warns Against Attacks On Commercial Ships Amid Hormuz Crisis, Calls For Peace And DialogueRestraint vs Outrage: Congress Divide Exposed Again As Shashi Tharoor Backs Modi Govt On Iran CrisisIndia Faces Energy Shock As Qatar’s LNG Output Drops By 17% After Missile Strike Damages Ras Laffan’Your Husband Will Die’ Retired Navy Officer Turned Astrologer Used Fear To Rape, Blackmail WomanIndia Draws Red Line: Shashi Tharoor Rejects Donald Trump Call, Signals Strategic Autonomy Over WarIndia Blasts Pakistan At United Nations, Says Must End Terror Before Talking Of Indus Waters TreatyDelhi HC Orders Tight Security In Uttam Nagar After Eid Threat Remark123Photostories6 spiritual cities emerging as India’s real estate hotspots in 20265 ways to use avocado peel in daily meal plans10 simple activities that boost memory and cognition naturally‘Rehnaa Hai Terre Dil Mein’, ‘Andaz Apna Apna’, ‘Dhol’: Films that failed at first but became cult classics over timeInside Shiv Nadar’s Luxurious Delhi Residence: A blend of art, elegance, and grandeurDhokla recipe mistakes: 6 common mistakes to avoid while making dhokla‘Garam Masala’, ‘Hera Pheri’, ‘Bhool Bhulaiyaa’: Must-watch Akshay Kumar and Priyadarshan films on OTT before ‘Bhooth Bangla’Delhi Metro hits new heights: Inside its tallest-ever engineering marvel6 ways you unknowingly invite bad treatment – And how to fix it, as per psychologistFrom caste maths to influencers: How parties are fighting Tamil Nadu assembly polls 2026123Hot PicksIran newsGlobal Terrorism Index 2026World Happiness Report 2026Gold rate todayIncome Tax CalculatorPublic holidays March 2026Bank Holidays MarchTop TrendingElena GaleraUttarakhand High CourtAndhra Pradesh high courtQatar LNG ExportsIran Karaj Missile PlantIsrael Haifa Refinery AttackStrait of HormuzMaharastra LocalsAli Mohammed NainiPremium Petrol Price Hike
NEW DELHI: Chief Justice of India Surya Kant on Friday stepped aside from hearing a batch of petitions that question the constitutional validity of the 2023 law governing the appointment of the chief election commissioner (CEC) and election commissioners, saying his presence on the bench could raise concerns of conflict of interest.“I will be accused of conflict of interest. There is a conflict of interest,” the CJI said at the beginning of the hearing, as quoted by PTI. He was part of a bench with Justices Joymalya Bagchi and Vipul M Pancholi.
The petitions challenge provisions of the Chief Election Commissioner and Other Election Commissioners (Appointment, Conditions of Service and Term of Office) Act, 2023, which removed the Chief Justice of India from the selection panel for appointing the CEC and ECs. According to the petitioners, this change weakens the independence of the appointment process.The issue stems from a March 2023 ruling by a five-judge constitution bench, which held that the CEC and election commissioners should be appointed on the recommendation of a panel made up of the prime minister, the leader of the opposition in the Lok Sabha and the chief justice of India. The court had said this arrangement would continue until Parliament brought in a law.Parliament later passed the 2023 law in December that year. Under this law, the selection committee includes the prime minister, a Union minister chosen by the prime minister, and the leader of Opposition, or the leader of the largest opposition party in the Lok Sabha.Several petitioners have challenged the law, including Congress leader Jaya Thakur and the Association for Democratic Reforms.While recusing himself, the CJI said the matter should go before a bench in which no judge is in line to become the chief justice. Senior advocate Prashant Bhushan, appearing for one of the petitioners, agreed with the suggestion and said that would remove any possible impression of bias.“I personally don’t have any problem, but it can be listed before a bench not having a prospective CJI,” Bhushan said.The CJI then directed that the matter be listed before another bench on April 7 and indicated that the new bench would be made up of judges who are not in line to hold the office of the Chief Justice of India.The Centre has earlier defended the appointment of two new election commissioners under the 2023 law, arguing in the Supreme Court that the Election Commission’s independence does not depend on the inclusion of a judicial member in the selection committee.In an affidavit, the Union Law Ministry also rejected the petitioners’ allegation that the appointments made on March 14, 2024, were rushed through to “pre-empt” any order the apex court might pass the next day, when the petitions were scheduled to be heard on interim relief.The Supreme Court had earlier declined to stay the appointment of the new election commissioners under the 2023 law.
