Case UpdateConstitutional Law📍 Supreme Court of India
Supreme Court Delivers Split Verdict On Sending Election Commissioner Appointment Law Challenge To Larger Bench
A two-judge Supreme Court bench delivered a split verdict on whether petitions challenging the 2023 law excluding the CJI from the Election Commission selection panel should be referred to a 5-judge Constitution Bench.
📅 24 Sep 2026👤 For: All Legal Professionals📰 Source:
Bar and Bench👁 25 views
⚖️ Case Details
Anjali Bhardwaj & Ors. v. Union of India
Supreme Court of India
Justice Dipankar Datta and Justice Satish Chandra Sharma
23 Sep 2026
2026 LiveLaw (SC) 991 / 2026 Bar & Bench (SC) 842
Whether the Chief Election Commissioner and Other Election Commissioners Act, 2023—which replaces the Chief Justice of India with a Union Cabinet Minister on the selection panel—violates the independence of the Election Commission and whether the challenge requires reference to a 5-judge Constitution Bench.
The Supreme Court of India on September 23, 2026, delivered a split verdict on the Union Government's request to refer petitions challenging the Chief Election Commissioner and Other Election Commissioners Act, 2023 to a larger 5-judge Constitution Bench.
Bench Divided Over Necessity of Larger Bench Reference
A Bench comprising Justice Dipankar Datta and Justice Satish Chandra Sharma differed in opinion, leaving the reference issue to be decided by Chief Justice of India Surya Kant.
Key Observations and Legal Findings
Justice Dipankar Datta's View: Rejected the Centre's demand for a reference. Justice Datta observed that the selection panel—comprising the Prime Minister, a Cabinet Minister, and the Leader of Opposition—fails to provide an independent counterweight, as a Cabinet Minister cannot be expected to defy the Prime Minister.
Justice Satish Chandra Sharma's View: Agreed with the Centre, holding that a substantial question of constitutional law is involved regarding legislative wisdom versus judicial precedent, requiring adjudication by a Constitution Bench.
Reflected Institutional Concerns: Justice Datta remarked that the Court's inability to speak in one voice dilutes institutional cohesion, while emphasizing that the Election Commission must not only be independent but also be seen to be independent.
The matter will now be placed before the Chief Justice of India to determine whether a 5-judge Constitution Bench should be constituted to hear the challenge.
📌 Held by the Court
Split Verdict. Justice Datta rejected the reference request and prima facie held the panel structure flawed, while Justice Sharma held that a substantial question of law exists requiring a 5-judge bench reference. Referred to CJI for administrative directions.
⚡ Practical Impact
Paves the way for the Chief Justice of India to potentially constitute a 5-judge Constitution Bench to permanently resolve the constitutional validity of the 2023 Election Commission selection law.
👔 For Lawyers & Advocates
High constitutional significance for public law litigators, constitutional law scholars, and election law specialists.
🤖 Key Takeaway
The exclusion of neutral judicial members from statutory selection panels for constitutional bodies continues to ignite sharp judicial debate regarding institutional independence.
