The Calcutta High Court on Friday ruled that the Election Commission of India (ECI) cannot impose a blanket ban on motorcycle movement in the name of ensuring free and fair elections during the ongoing West Bengal polls.
Justice Krishna Rao struck down the Commission’s order restricting bike movement between 6 pm and 6 am from two days before polling and on election day. The court said it failed to see the rationale behind a sweeping prohibition on motorcycle use.
The bench observed, “This Court failed to appreciate why the respondent no. 3 has imposed restrictions upon the riding of motorcycles two days before polling day. In the name of free and fair polls, the authorities cannot pass a blanket restriction on motorcycle riding.”
Limited curbs allowed to prevent poll violence
While setting aside the blanket ban, the court upheld certain restrictions imposed by the ECI, noting that measures to prevent violence ahead of polling were justified.
With modifications, the court permitted the following:
- No motorcycle rallies from two days before polling
- No pillion riding 12 hours before polling, except for emergencies or essential needs
- On polling day, family pillion riding is allowed between 6 am and 6 pm for voting and essential purposes
- Exemptions for service providers such as Ola, Uber, Zomato, Swiggy, and office-goers with valid identification
The court made it clear that while rallies could be restricted, the general movement of motorcycles could not be prohibited.
ECI order challenged over livelihood concerns
The ECI’s April 20 notification had effectively barred motorcycle use between 6 pm and 6 am two days before polling, with limited exemptions. With regard to the polling day, the notification said, “Family pillion riding on motorcycles shall be allowed from 06:00 AM to 6:00 PM for voting purpose and for other essential requirements like medical emergency, family function etc.
The order was later relaxed to include delivery personnel and office commuters.
The restrictions were challenged by advocate Ritankar Das, who argued that the curbs were arbitrary and adversely affected daily commuters, including legal professionals. He told the court that relying on taxis or private cars was not financially viable and that the order hindered his ability to attend court.
The plea also contended that requiring police permission for exemptions was impractical and that the restrictions violated the fundamental right to livelihood.
Court cites lack of legal backing for blanket ban
In its judgment, the court noted that there is no provision in law allowing authorities to impose such broad restrictions on motorcycle movement ahead of polling.
While acknowledging the wide powers of the ECI under Article 324(1) of the Constitution, the bench stressed that these powers must operate within the framework of existing laws.
The court also pointed out that adequate security arrangements, including deployment of paramilitary forces and police, were already in place to maintain order. Vehicle checking mechanisms were also available.
Against this backdrop, the bench said it could not justify the need for a blanket restriction and modified the ECI’s directions ahead of the April 29 polling date.