Two-child norm for contesting polls has lost relevance amid falling fertility rates, says SC
Advertisement
New Delhi, Nov 4 : The Supreme Court on Wednesday observed that India’s demographic landscape has undergone a significant transformation over the past two decades, and hence laws disqualifying individuals with more than two children from contesting elections may no longer be relevant in the present context.
A Bench of the apex court noted that the country's fertility rate has witnessed a steady decline and has now fallen below the replacement level of 2.1. It raises concerns about an ageing population in the coming decades.
In view of this changing demographic reality, the court questioned the continued justification for statutory provisions that bar persons with more than two children from contesting local body elections.
The observations came while the court set aside the disqualification of Mangala Bhimrao, a former Sarpanch of Maharashtra’s Kakoda Gram Panchayat, who had been barred from contesting elections following the birth of her third child.
While allowing her appeal, the Supreme Court decided to revisit its earlier position on the issue and referred the landmark Javed vs State of Haryana (2003) judgment to a larger Bench for reconsideration.
In the 2003 ruling, a three-judge Bench upheld the constitutional validity of provisions under the Haryana Panchayati Raj Act, 1994, which disqualified persons having more than two living children from contesting panchayat polls.
The court pointed out that when the Javed judgment was delivered, India’s Total Fertility Rate (TFR) stood at around three children per woman, making population control a significant policy concern. However, demographic indicators have now changed substantially since then, with the TFR steadily declining across the country.
Noting these developments, the apex court said that a larger Bench will now determine whether such electoral disqualification provisions remain constitutionally valid and relevant in a country where population growth has slowed significantly, and concerns about demographic ageing are increasingly emerging.
A Bench of the apex court noted that the country's fertility rate has witnessed a steady decline and has now fallen below the replacement level of 2.1. It raises concerns about an ageing population in the coming decades.
In view of this changing demographic reality, the court questioned the continued justification for statutory provisions that bar persons with more than two children from contesting local body elections.
The observations came while the court set aside the disqualification of Mangala Bhimrao, a former Sarpanch of Maharashtra’s Kakoda Gram Panchayat, who had been barred from contesting elections following the birth of her third child.
While allowing her appeal, the Supreme Court decided to revisit its earlier position on the issue and referred the landmark Javed vs State of Haryana (2003) judgment to a larger Bench for reconsideration.
In the 2003 ruling, a three-judge Bench upheld the constitutional validity of provisions under the Haryana Panchayati Raj Act, 1994, which disqualified persons having more than two living children from contesting panchayat polls.
The court pointed out that when the Javed judgment was delivered, India’s Total Fertility Rate (TFR) stood at around three children per woman, making population control a significant policy concern. However, demographic indicators have now changed substantially since then, with the TFR steadily declining across the country.
Noting these developments, the apex court said that a larger Bench will now determine whether such electoral disqualification provisions remain constitutionally valid and relevant in a country where population growth has slowed significantly, and concerns about demographic ageing are increasingly emerging.
Advertisement
Note: The content of this article is sourced from a news agency and has not been edited by the ap7am team.