Puneet Bachchan (LAW STUDENT) 23 December 2008

VOTE-49'O'

A FRIEND OF MINE HAVE MAILED ME THAT-----

"Did you know that there is a system in our constitution, as per the 1969 act, in section "49-O" that a person can go to the polling booth, confirm his identity, get his finger marked and convey the presiding election officer that he doesn't want to vote anyone!

Yes such a feature is available, but obviously these seemingly notorious leaders have never disclosed it. This is called "49-O".

Why should you go and say "I VOTE NOBODY"... because, in a ward, if a candidate wins, say by 123 votes, and that particular ward has received "49-O" votes more than 123, then that polling will be cancelled and will have to be re-polled. Not only that, but the candidature of the contestants will be removed and they cannot contest the re-polling, since people had already expressed their decision on them. This would bring fear into parties and hence look for genuine candidates for their parties for election.. This would change the way, of our whole political system... it is seemingly surprising why the election commission has not revealed such a feature to the public....

Seems to be a wonderful weapon against corrupt parties in India... show your power, expressing your desire not to vote for anybody, is even more powerful than voting"

MY QUESTION IS THAT IS IT TRUE, IF YES, Y CANT WE REALLY USE IT AGAINST ALL THE CORRUPT POLITICIANS?

Reply Follow

5 Replies

Jaydeep Kurup (ACS, LLB) 23 December 2008

Please note that first of all there is no such section in the Constitution. There is a 49-0 rule in the Conduct of Election Rules, 1961 which only gives the right to give a neutral / negative vote against any political party which will be recorded by the electorate.

However neither the said rules nor the constitution has any provision for cancellation of polling / candidature.

Members may give a different opinion if they have cited any such provision.

Shree. ( Advocate.) 23 December 2008

Dear Puneet,

Well, here’s the text of Rule 49-O of the Conduct of Elections Rules, 1961 (“Rules”):

49-O. Elector deciding not to vote.-If an elector, after his electoral roll number has been duly entered in the register of voters in Form-17A and has put his signature or thumb impression thereon as required under sub-rule (1) of rule 49L, decided not to record his vote, a remark to this effect shall be made against the said entry in Form 17A by the presiding officer and the signature or thumb impression of the elector shall be obtained against such remark.

Rule 49-O falls under the Chapter II of Part IV of the Rules which was introduced in 1992 and deals only with voting by electronic voting machines or EVMs. The remark referred to here is an offline entry by the presiding offer (accompanied by the voter’s signature) to record the fact that a vote was not electronically recorded even though the voter had registered in the register of voters. This would allow reconciliation of mismatches arising from a situation where you have lesser votes polled in the machines than the names entered and signed in the register of voters. There is no provision for polling to be cancelled based on the number of 49-O votes.

Just my too paise worth on a chain mail that’s getting everyone very enthusiastic about elections.

ramesh (Advocate) 24 December 2008

I found the following

Rule No. 49(O) in the Conduct of Election Rules 1961 says:

"Elector deciding not to vote - If an elector, after his electoral roll number has been duly entered in the register of voters in Form 17 A and has put his signature or thumb impression thereon as required under sub-rule (1) of rule 49L, decided not to record his vote, a remark to this effect shall be made against the said entry in Form 17A by the presiding officer, and the signature or thumb impression of the elector shall be obtained against such remark."

Steps for doing this :

1. while registering the name at the time of voting, convey to the booth officials that you want to go for 49'O.

2. Fill the 49'O form available there.

Done.

Now, for the best part: If the number of 49'O count is larger than that of the winning candidate's total vote count, then a re-election is called there.

Here's an example. Say there's a candidate standing in City A.

Say out of 100 people only 40 people turn to vote and out of that the candidate recieves 30 votes. Then by rule, he's been declared as elected. But say, if out of the 100 people 70 turn to vote and 30 people vote for the candidate and the other 40 people use section 49(0), to say "i am not interested in any of the candidates" - then if the candidate's vote(30, in this case) is less than the vote against him (under section 49(0) - which is 40), then by rule he would not be elected as winner and in turn he would not be able to participate in any further elections. And the election for City A will be re-held with fresh candidates.

please clarify

SANJAY DIXIT (Advocate) 25 December 2008

It is not explicitly impressed or mentioned in any sections of the Conduct of Elections Rules, 1961 that in above circumstances the poll will be declared as null and void and a re-poll will be held barring the existing contestants from re-contesting. It allows a person to cast a non-vote to prevent his vote from being misused.

Source-

https://indianlawinfo.blog.co.in/