In a landmark judgment that champions inclusivity and dignity, the Kerala High Court has firmly rejected a controversial plea seeking separate electronic voting machines for inmates of mental health rehabilitation centers during the 2025 general elections.
Court Denounces Stigma Against Mental Illness
The bench of Justice P V Kunhikrishnan delivered a powerful message against social stigma while hearing a petition that alleged inmates of mental health facilities cannot vote according to their free will. The plea had specifically requested directions to keep the votes of persons in mental health rehabilitation centers in a separate electronic voting machine during the 2025 polls.
The court strongly condemned the labeling of individuals as mentally ill, noting that such terminology promotes social exclusion and various forms of discrimination. Justice Kunhikrishnan emphasized that mental illness is not a sin and affected individuals need care and support rather than exclusion from fundamental democratic rights.
Legal Framework and Due Process
The court meticulously examined the legal provisions governing voting rights, particularly Section 74 of the Kerala Municipality Act, 1994, which deals with disqualifications for electoral registration. The provision clearly states that a person shall be disqualified only if they are of unsound mind and stand so declared by a competent court.
Justice Kunhikrishnan pointed out the absence of any case proving that potential voters from the rehabilitation center were formally declared persons of unsound mind by a competent court. The judgment underscored that mere assumption of mental illness cannot justify disenfranchisement, highlighting the critical importance of due process.
Procedural Flaws in the Petition
The court identified significant procedural shortcomings in the petition, noting that the persons alleged to be mentally ill were not even made parties to the case. Justice Kunhikrishnan observed that if the petitioners genuinely believed these individuals were suffering from mental illness, they ought to have been made parties through a fit person as required by law.
The bench refused to presume that persons staying in a rehabilitation center are automatically mentally ill, stating that such presumption would be an insult to them, especially when they were not represented in the proceedings. This aspect of the judgment reinforces the principle of natural justice and the right to be heard.
Poetic Justice and Social Responsibility
In a moving conclusion, Justice Kunhikrishnan quoted renowned Malayalam poet Sugathakumari, translating her verse about emerging from darkness to witness the beauty outside and experience the supreme festival of life. The court used this poetic reference to emphasize society's responsibility toward mental health patients.
Rather than denying voting rights, the court suggested that petitioners should visit rehabilitation centers and motivate inmates. The judgment called for helping them open the dark door by holding their hands and leading them toward the light of democratic participation.
The Kerala High Court's progressive stance, delivered on November 19, 2025, sets a significant precedent for protecting the voting rights of vulnerable populations and challenges deep-seated social prejudices against mental illness. This decision marks a crucial step toward creating a more inclusive democracy where dignity and rights are preserved for all citizens, regardless of their health conditions.
