Mr. Om Prakash,

I understand your concern but what I have written in my answer is that in the case of Anukul Chandra Pradhan v. Union Of India And Others (Supreme Court Case) is that the petitioner had "CONTENDED" or "ARGUED" that s.62(5) is in violation of Article 14 and 21. 

The following is the direct quote from the judgement:

"The learned counsel contended that this is discrimination and violates Article 14 of the Constitution. lt was further contended by the learned counsel that there is violation also of Article 21 inasmuch as the restriction placed on the prisoner's right to vote by sub-section (5) of Section 62 of the Act denies dignity of life."

Even though the petitioner had contended this, the SC still did not give the convicts the right to vote. 

If there is still any issue, please do let me know. 


Palak Singh

Deputy Manager

Thanks, Ms. Palak Singh. I have no ego issue or Ill feelings against the novices, but love to impart my very little knowledge with the public at large, and I consider myself yet a student/learner in the field of legal profession. But, sorry to be the tutor of novices.

if the accused is on bail he have right to vote or not



Your are not logged in . Please login to post replies

Click here to Login / Register  


  Search Forum


  LAWyersclubindia Menu

Join the MasterClass     |    x