While the judgment rightly protected the electoral rights of individuals with mental disabilities, it was limited in its jurisprudence assessment of the political rights of persons with disabilities. Despite decades of electoral litigation, Indian courts have consistently declined to provide a substantive definition of ‘unsound mind’ in the context of voting. However, these three legislative efforts share a common limitation: they attempt to address capacity and disability rights but fail to resolve the question of electoral capacity specifically. First, Parliament must amend Article 326 or enact comprehensive electoral legislation that provides a clear, functional definition of electoral incapacity. Third, courts should develop a jurisprudence that harmonises voting rights with disability rights, draws upon international human rights standards, and provides clear tests for lower courts to apply.

Source: The Telegraph February 03, 2026 02:43 UTC