NOTA cannot fill up a seat: SC questions its impact, considers electoral reforms

The Supreme Court of India has raised serious questions about the practical impact of the None of the Above (NOTA) option in elections, saying it has “hardly made an impact in ten years” and cannot fill a seat even if it receives the most votes. During hearings this week, a bench led by Chief Justice Surya Kant and Justice Joymalya Bagchi examined a petition challenging a legal provision that allows a lone candidate to be declared elected uncontested without any poll, effectively denying voters the chance to choose NOTA.

NOTA was introduced in 2013 after the Supreme Court directed the Election Commission to include it on Electronic Voting Machines, giving voters a formal way to reject all candidates while preserving ballot secrecy. Since then, its use has remained low in national and state polls, generally around about 1 percent of votes , prompting the Election Commission to describe it as largely symbolic.

The petitioners, including the Vidhi Centre for Legal Policy, argue that denying NOTA in uncontested elections violates the right to vote and freedom of expression , since voters cannot formally register disapproval of the sole candidate. The bench noted that educated and affluent voters often participate less than others, underlining broader concerns about citizen engagement. Justices also floated ideas such as requiring a minimum vote threshold for uncontested winners or even holding polls regardless of the number of candidates to uphold meaningful choice.

Chief Justice Kant suggested that a compulsory but non‑punitive mechanism to boost voting might strengthen democracy and reduce reliance on NOTA. The Attorney General countered that changes to the law are a parliamentary matter , noting that voting itself is a statutory, not fundamental, right. The case has been adjourned for further hearing on March 17, 2026 , as the court weighs whether electoral reforms are needed to ensure voters’ rights are meaningful.