Agrawal said the woman again approached the High Court, which disposed of the application seeking grant of interim relief on May 6.
On May 6, the High Court rejected her application stating that the polling date was May 7 and the directions issued by the EC regarding the issuance and collection of postal ballot papers could not be completed within 24 hours.
The woman approached the Supreme Court challenging the May 6 order of the High Court.
“The election has become difficult,” the Supreme Court said, adding that voting day was May 7.
Mr. Agrawal said that as per Rule 27(I) of the Election Conduct Rules, postal ballots can be received any time up to the counting date scheduled for June 4.
“Even for mail-in voting, there is a fixed period of time. If a certain period of time is set for mail-in voting, that procedure must be followed,” the court said.
Mr Agrawal said the High Court had passed an order in favor of the appellant on April 29.
Referring to its April 29 order, the court said the high court had directed the authorities to consider the petitioner’s application.
“After consideration, we found that you were not significantly disabled, so we rejected your application,” the court said, adding, “We also considered your medical certificate.”
The Supreme Court found that the appellant had not even submitted the standard disability certificate.
“Everyone wants to sit at home and vote,” the court said, adding: “We do not intend to respond to this appeal.”
“First of all, you need to submit a standard disability certificate. After that, we will check whether this certificate is correct,” he said.
He also asked, “If you are under 80 years old, why should you be allowed to do so?”
The court said it did not intend to interfere with the interim order passed by the high court.
