"Instilling confidence in the election process is vital for the maintenance of constitutional democracy," the Supreme Court said on Wednesday as it asked the Andhra Pradesh State Election Commission (APSEC) to defer publishing the final list of candidates for civic polls until October 25.

A vacation bench of Justices Joymalya Bagchi and V Mohana was hearing a plea of Yuvajana Sramika Rythu Congress Party (YSRCP) alleging its candidates were not allowed to fill nomination papers for the upcoming polls due to violence and threats given to them.

It directed the state poll panel to consider the complaints by YSRCP and other candidates with relevant materials that they were prevented from filing nomination papers and take a decision by Thursday on extending the nomination deadline.

The bench directed the state Director General of Police (DGP) to provide adequate security to the contesting candidates and the election offices, while observing that filing of nomination papers was a facet of free and fair elections.

The court clarified that it was not directly intervening in the election process but was allowing the SEC to consider the party's grievance and take an appropriate decision.

The bench observed that while constitutional courts would not ordinarily interfere with the election process, their hands are not tied when intervention is necessary to ensure that free and fair elections are not polluted by unconstitutional or illegal means.

"Instilling confidence in the election process is vital for the maintenance of constitutional democracy. While the constitutional courts would not ordinarily interfere with the election process, their hands are not tied when appropriate interference is necessary to ensure that free and fair elections are not polluted by unconstitutional or illegal means," it said.

The top court said YS Jagan Mohan Reddy-led YSRCP has "made out prima facie case" that several of its candidates were stopped from filing nomination papers for polls to around 100 urban local bodies.

"Bearing in mind these principles and the materials placed before us, which include various representations made by the petitioner-party as well as the candidates before the SEC both physically and in electronic form, as well as electronic evidence in the form of video clippings, etc., we are of the opinion that the petitioner has made out a prima facie case for passing the directions," it recorded in its order.

It asked the state election commission to take all necessary steps to remove any apprehension from the minds of YSRCP and other candidates regarding free and fair elections in the state.

The bench asked the AP SEC to file its compliance affidavit by October 27, which is the next date of hearing.

"Free and fair election is a basic structure of the Constitution. The right to participate in such elections by filing nominations is a facet of the free and fair election process.

"While it is the constitutional mandate to vest the state election commission with the duty of conducting and supervising such elections, which would necessarily include all steps to ensure free and transparent filing of nomination papers by the contesting candidates, the power of the constitutional courts to exercise judicial review in furtherance of the election process cannot be said to be wholly nugatory," it said.

The bench said that the court was conscious of the judicial deference to the powers of the SEC in the matter of holding elections.

"Such philosophy of deference has grown from a doctrine of necessity that the election process must be entrusted in the hands of an independent constitutional authority and within a timeline, and not be mired in the quagmire of judicial interference," it said.

The bench added that at the same time, it cannot be ignored that the custodian of constitutional values is the constitutional courts and the power of judicial review to ensure a free and fair election by filing of nomination papers cannot be wholly muted when a principal opposition party approaches the court with relevant materials expressing serious apprehensions with regard to hindrance in filing of nomination papers.

The YSRCP alleged that in around 19 such urban local bodies, the candidates of the ruling party were likely to get elected unopposed as opposition party candidates were not allowed to file nomination papers because of violence and obstruction.

Senior advocate Siddharth Luthra, appearing for the state government, opposed the plea of YSRCP, represented by senior advocate Maninder Singh and advocate Mahfooz Ahsan Nazki.

The bench said if law and order casts its ugly shadow on fair and impartial elections, the courts will have to uphold constitutional values of fair and impartial elections.

The YSRCP has sought police protection for candidates, an extension of the deadline for filing nominations, and the designation of additional and alternative nomination centres to enable candidates to submit their papers safely.

The plea filed by general secretary Lella Appireddy said that several of its candidates were allegedly assaulted and physically prevented from reaching nomination centres during the nomination period, which began on October 16 and ended on October 18.

The High Court had dismissed the party's application seeking an extension, holding that the deadline had expired and that extending it would amount to interference with the election process.