In a functioning democracy, the integrity of elections depends upon a transparent, inclusive, and reliable electoral process. In India, this process is governed by the Representation of the People Act, 1950 (RPA, 1950), which lays down the legal framework for the preparation, revision, and maintenance of electoral rolls. While Sections 21 to 23 of the Act confer substantive powers relating to the preparation, correction, and revision of electoral rolls, Section 32 plays a crucial safeguarding role by enforcing accountability through penal sanctions. It ensures that electoral authorities discharge their statutory duties faithfully, thereby protecting the sanctity of the electoral rolls.
Understanding Section 32
Section 32 lays down punishment for election officials who fail to properly perform their duties related to the preparation, revision, correction, or inclusion and deletion of names in the electoral rolls. If an Electoral Registration Officer, Assistant Electoral Registration Officer, or any other person assigned such duties, without a valid reason, commits an act or omission that breaches their official responsibility, they can be punished with imprisonment ranging from a minimum of three months up to two years, along with a fine.
At the same time, the law protects these officials from civil lawsuits for damages arising out of such acts or omissions. Further, no court can take cognizance of an offence under this section unless a formal complaint is made with the approval of the Election Commission of India or the Chief Electoral Officer of the concerned State, ensuring that prosecutions are initiated only in serious and authorised cases.
Prosecutions under Section 32 remain rare in practice, as noted in recent reports. FIRs against BLOs or EROs for electoral roll lapses are infrequent, largely due to the high threshold for proving culpable breach and the mandatory prior sanction from the Election Commission or Chief Electoral Officer.
Statutory Context and Operational Framework
The substantive authority for maintaining electoral rolls flows from Sections 21, 22, and 23 of the Act, which deal with the preparation, correction, and inclusion or deletion of entries. Section 32 complements these provisions by ensuring that the powers conferred are exercised responsibly and in accordance with law. Together, these sections reflect the legislative intent to balance administrative discretion with legal accountability.
Role of the Electoral Registration Officer (ERO)
Under the RPA, 1950, the Electoral Registration Officer bears primary responsibility for the preparation, revision, correction, and maintenance of electoral rolls within a constituency. Appointed by the Election Commission of India in consultation with the State Government under Section 13B, the ERO—often a senior revenue or administrative officer—oversees the entire process, including field verification through Booth Level Officers (BLOs), disposal of claims and objections, and final publication of the rolls.
Section 32 strengthens this framework by attaching criminal consequences to breaches of official duty by the ERO and other designated officers. At the same time, it provides procedural safeguards by requiring prior sanction from the Election Commission or the Chief Electoral Officer before prosecution, thereby preventing frivolous or vexatious proceedings against officials acting in good faith.
Significance in Democratic Governance
Section 32 serves several vital democratic functions. First, it reinforces the principle of universal adult suffrage by ensuring that administrative lapses or misconduct do not result in wrongful exclusion or inclusion of voters. Second, it acts as a bulwark against electoral fraud, discouraging manipulation of electoral rolls through deterrent punishment. Third, by mandating accountability, it enhances public confidence in the electoral process and strengthens the credibility of democratic institutions. Finally, it institutionalises administrative responsibility, ensuring that officials entrusted with electoral duties remain answerable under law.
Contemporary Relevance and Challenges
With the advent of digitised electoral rolls, online voter registration, and photo electoral identity cards, the implementation of the RPA, 1950 has evolved significantly. These technological interventions have improved accuracy and accessibility, yet challenges persist. Migration, delayed updates in remote or densely populated areas, lack of public awareness, and occasional administrative errors continue to affect the accuracy of electoral rolls. In this context, Section 32 remains critically relevant as a legal tool to enforce diligence and integrity in electoral administration.
Drawbacks
Despite its importance, Section 32 faces practical limitations. Prosecutions under the provision are rare, partly due to procedural safeguards and the high threshold required to establish culpable breach of duty. Administrative delays, resource constraints, and systemic challenges sometimes dilute its deterrent effect. Moreover, reliance on citizens to raise objections presupposes awareness and access, which may not always exist, particularly among marginalised populations.
Documents Required for Electoral Registration
The procedural framework for inclusion of names in the electoral roll is governed by the Registration of Electors Rules, 1960. Rule 26 requires an eligible person to apply in Form 6, furnishing particulars relating to age, ordinary residence, and citizenship, while authorising the ERO to verify the information. Although Rule 26 does not enumerate specific documents, Rule 26B expressly empowers the ERO to seek documentary proof of age and ordinary residence, either at the time of application or subsequently. The nature of such documents is prescribed through instructions and notifications issued by the Election Commission of India under Article 324 of the Constitution. Read together, Rules 26 and 26B constitute the complete legal framework governing voter registration and verification.
Conclusion
Section 32 of the Representation of the People Act, 1950 is more than a penal clause; it is a cornerstone of electoral accountability in India’s democratic framework. By attaching criminal liability to breaches of official duty, it reinforces the integrity of electoral rolls and ensures that statutory powers relating to voter registration are exercised responsibly. In an era of expanding electorates and increasing administrative complexity, Section 32 continues to play a vital role in safeguarding the democratic principle that every eligible citizen’s vote must count—and be counted lawfully.
