EVM
Bengaluru, 9th September(Karnataka Information): Supreme Court comes down heavily on PILs against EVMs, says issue being raised time and again
Justice Khanna, SC Judge observes “Petitioner getting overly suspicious”
“Every 6-8 months, EVM issue is freshly raised. EC counter-affidavit very
detailed. No urgency to hear the petition” : Hon’ble SC Earlier, Courts have called it more “Publicity Interest Litigation” than Public Interest Litigation Recently, Delhi High Court while expressing confidence in the robust and transparent FLC process also dismissed a Petition by
Delhi Pradesh Congress Committee उच्चतम नयायालय की फटकार - क्यूँ बार बार EVM की निष्पक्षता पर सवाल उठाते है चुनाव आते ही evm का रोना शुरू; उच्चतम न्यालय की फटकार
100% VVPAT verification idea “regressive”, akin to shifting to paper ballot system: says ECI in detailed affidavit to SC Manual counting of VVPAT slips is worse than Paper Ballot and may also lead to manipulation of results : Affidavit
The Supreme Court has come down heavily on a petition challenging use of
EVMs. In a series of observations, the Court has questioned the need for taking up the issue so frequently.
Election Commission of India has filed a detailed affidavit in the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the matter of Association for Democratic Reforms vs. Election Commission of India [WPC No. 434/2023] relating to EVM/ VVPATs.
Justice Sanjiv Khanna while hearing the matter, at the very onset, remarked
that issues relating to EVMs are being raised time and again and that Mr
Prashant Bhushan, Advocate for the Petitioner, was being overly suspicious
with this petition. He also said that every year such petitions are being filed.
The Hon’ble Judge said “ ECI has filed a detailed counter-affidavit. Mr
Prashant Bhushan, how many times will this issue be raised? Every 6-8
months, this issue is freshly raised.”
Justice Khanna further remarked that he had gone through the Counter
Affidavit filed on behalf of ECI and after examining it, he did not see any
urgency to list the matter anytime soon. Mr Prashant Bhushan insisted that the
Counter Affidavit filed by ECI contained incorrect statements and that the
matter should be listed after two weeks but the same was denied after Justice
Khanna observed that the CA filed by ECI was very detailed. The petitioner
has now been granted one week's time to file rejoinder and the matter will be
taken up in November.
Earlier, various Hon’ble High Courts had also penalised petitions raising
doubts on EVM integrity citing them as “Publicity Interest Litigations” rather
than Public Interest Litigations (PILs).
Recently, it may be recalled that the Delhi High Court while expressing
confidence in the robust and transparent FLC process also dismissed a
Petition by Delhi Pradesh Congress Committee seeking termination and
reinitiating the ongoing FLC for EVMs & VVPATS in NCR for 2024 LS
elections. The Court expressing its displeasure towards the DPCC said
“Abstaining from participation in FLC process and later questioning the
integrity of the same process does not reflect well on the Petitioner”
In its affidavit, ECI mentioned that the present petition is another attempt to
cast doubt on the functioning of EVMs/VVPATs with vague and baseless
grounds and without providing substantial evidence and similar petitions
are anticipated in the lead-up to the 2024 Lok Sabha Elections. The
Commission has observed such practice before every round of elections.
There is a malafide intention to create a fake narrative around EVMs and
disregard the integrity of EVMs to create doubt in the mind of voters.
The Commission through its affidavit emphasised that the true test of any
election system is faithful translation of people’s will into election results. Apart
from the fact that EVM has faithfully reflected the mandates of the people over
these years, the Constitutional Courts ( in over twenty five such cases filed
before the Hon’ble Supreme & High Courts) have also always upheld the use
of EVMs in Indian elections and its integrity. Since the introduction of EVM in
the elections system ( 2004 onwards), the party getting the maximum
number of seats changed 44 times in Assembly elections and twice in
Lok Sabha Elections. AITC won 3 consecutive Assembly Election in
West Bengal with EVM , AAP which won 2 consecutive Assembly
Election in Delhi and recently Punjab Assembly Election with EVM;
CPI(M) which won 4 consecutive Assembly Election in Kerala with EVM.
After the introduction of EVM, all political parties have won elections
based on people’s mandates.
It may be recalled that CEC Shri Kumar during an interaction with media,
while dismissing allegations on EVMs functioning sarcastically said that, “ अगर
EVM बोल सकती तो क्या बोलती - जिसने मेरे सर पर तोहमत रखी है , मैंने उसके भी घर की
लाज़ रखी है” |
The petitioner had requested for 100% verification of VVPAT slips with the
votes casted in EVMs and also mentioned a vacuum in law as there has been
no procedure for the voter to verify that her vote has been ‘counted as
recorded’.
Responding to this, ECI rejected the suggestion as a regressive step akin
to shifting back to paper ballot system. Counting all the paper slips has its
costs in terms of skilled manpower and time required. Manual counting of this
scale will also be prone to human error and mischief. Manual counting of
VVPAT slips is worse than Paper Ballot and may also lead to manipulation of
results. Also no one has ever challenged the tampering of EVMs and
demand for 100 % VVPAT verification through an Election Petition than
through such vague PILs.
-min.png)