SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Headnote Court Copy Facts Arguments Court observation Judicial Analysis Case Map Category Hierarchy Table of Content
Listen Article Pause Article
judgment-img

2026 Supreme(Online)(AP) 37962

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI
V. Sujatha, J
Yuvajana Sramika Rythu Congress Party (YSRCP) – Appellant
Versus
State of Andhra Pradesh – Respondent
WRIT PETITION NO: 29932/2026



Important Points

The court held that security for election candidates should be provided based on individual threat perception assessments conducted by local police authorities upon receipt of appropriate applications from the candidates.

Subject

Constitutional Law - Election Law

Act Referred

Headnote

(A) Election Law - Security for Candidates - Ensuring free and fair elections - The State Election Commission and police authorities are responsible for assessing threat perceptions and providing necessary security to contesting candidates to ensure peaceful conduct of elections. (Para 5, 6)

Issues: Whether the court should direct the respondents to provide security and monitoring facilities for contesting candidates in local body elections.

Result: Disposed of with directions to candidates to apply for security and police to assess threat perception.

Legal Category Hierarchy

  • constitutional law
    • writ jurisdiction
  • administrative law
    • election law
      • election integrity and security
  • practice and procedure
    • remedies

Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Medapati Santosh Reddy
For the Respondents: GP for Home, D S Sivadarshan, N Ashwani Kumar, GP Municipal Admn and Urban Dev AP

Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased toissue a Writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction in the nature of Mandamus (a) direct Respondent No. 2 provide adequate and effective security to all contesting candidates from the date of filing of nominations till completion of the entire election process, including counting and declaration of results, (b) directing Respondent Nos. 1 to 3 to arrange uninterrupted CCTV coverage and live webcasting at all nomination centres, scrutiny and Returning Officers offices, sensitive and hypersensitive polling stations, strong rooms and counting centres, with reliable power backup, videography of nomination, scrutiny, withdrawal, polling and counting, and secure preservation of all recordings for not less than six months, with copies made available to contesting candidates on request (c) directing the Respondents to deploy designated officials to continuously monitor these feeds and respond promptly to any intimidation, violence or interference, and to deploy independent observers from outside the district in high-risk areas and mobile monitoring teams, empowered to report violations directly to the Commission (d) directing Respondent No. 3 to deploy sufficient security personnel in a fair and impartial manner across the State, with additional forces in locations identified as vulnerable, to provide police protection and escort to contesting candidates during nomination, campaign, polling and result declaration, and to issue instructions to all Station House Officers to receive and register complaints from candidates, agents and voters and to act impartially

IA NO: 1 OF 2026

Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased direct Respondent No. 2 State Election Commission to consider the Petitioner's representation dated 09.10.2026 and pass appropriate orders prior to issuance of election notification

The Court made the following:

ORDER:

The present Writ Petition came to be filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking the following relief:-

“....issue a Writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction in the nature of Mandamus (a) direct Respondent No.2 provide adequate and effective security to all contesting candidates from the date of filing of nominations till completion of the entire election process, including counting and declaration of results, (b) directing Respondent Nos.1 to 3 to arrange uninterrupted CCTV coverage and live webcasting at all nomination centres, scrutiny and Returning Officers’ offices, sensitive and hypersensitive polling stations, strong rooms and counting centres, with reliable power backup, videography of nomination, scrutiny, withdrawal, polling and counting, and secure preservation of all recordings for not less than six months, with copies made available to contesting candidates on request; (c) directing the Respondents to deploy designated officials to continuously monitor these feeds and respond promptly to any intimidation, violence or interference, and to deploy independent observers from outside the district in high-risk areas and mobile monitoring teams, empowered to report violations directly to the Commission; (d) directing Respondent No 3 to deploy sufficient security personnel in a fair and impartial manner across the State, with additional forces in locations identified as vulnerable, to provide police protection and escort to contesting candidates during nomination, campaign, polling and result declaration, and to issue instructions to all Station House Officers to receive and register complaints from candidates, agents and voters and to act impartially….”

The case of the petitioner is that, on 09.10.2026, the petitioner submitted a representation to the State

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top