The petitioners has sought clear guidelines for verifying EVM microcontroller chips, urging the EC to implement robust verification procedures.
The Supreme Court on Friday ruled that the petition seeking a policy for the verification of electronic voting machines (EVMs) should be heard by the same bench that delivered the verdict in April, rejecting the demand for reinstating paper ballots, news agency PTI reported.
A bench comprising Justices Vikram Nath and P. B. Varale asked senior advocate Gopal Sankaranarayanan, who is representing the petitioner, why the case should not be referred to the same bench. Sankaranarayanan pointed out that the court had already ruled on a batch of pleas related to EVMs in April.
Justice Nath in response reiterated, “It (plea) should go before the same bench.”
The bench further said, "To our understanding, the reliefs claimed by means of this petition under Article 32 of the Constitution of India would require interpretation/modification/implementation of the directions issued by this court vide judgement dated April 26, 2024 ..."
The Supreme Court in its April ruling had dismissed concerns over EVM manipulation. It had called such suspicions "unfounded" and asserted that the machines were "secured" against booth capturing and bogus voting. However, the court allowed a provision for unsuccessful candidates, particularly those finishing in second or third place in elections, to request the verification of microcontroller chips embedded in five percent of the EVMs per assembly constituency.
This verification could be carried out after the election results, provided a written request was made and a fee paid to the Election Commission (EC).
The court instructed that the petition be placed before Chief Justice Sanjiv Khanna to decide whether it shouldThe Supreme Court on Friday ruled that the petition seeking a policy for the verification of electronic voting machines (EVMs) should be heard by the same bench that delivered the verdict in April, rejecting the demand for reinstating paper ballots, news agency PTI reported.
A bench comprising Justices Vikram Nath and P. B. Varale asked senior advocate Gopal Sankaranarayanan, who is representing the petitioner, why the case should not be referred to the same bench. Sankaranarayanan pointed out that the court had already ruled on a batch of pleas related to EVMs in April.
Justice Nath in response reiterated, “It (plea) should go before the same bench.”
The bench further said, "To our understanding, the reliefs claimed by means of this petition under Article 32 of the Constitution of India would require interpretation/modification/implementation of the directions issued by this court vide judgement dated April 26, 2024 ..."
The Supreme Court in its April ruling had dismissed concerns over EVM manipulation. It called such suspicions "unfounded" and asserted that the machines were "secured" against booth capturing and bogus voting. However, the court allowed a provision for unsuccessful candidates, particularly those finishing in second or third place in elections, to request the verification of microcontroller chips embedded in five percent of the EVMs per assembly constituency.
This verification could be carried out after the election results, provided a written request was made, and a fee paid to the Election Commission (EC).
The court instructed that the petition be placed before Chief Justice Sanjiv Khanna to decide whether it should be heard by the same bench or another.
The petition, filed by former Haryana minister Karan Singh Dalal and five-time MLA Lakhan Kumar Singla, seeks the implementation of the Supreme Court's April 26 ruling in the case of Association for Democratic Reforms versus Union of India. Both Dalal and Singla, who secured the second-highest number of votes in their respective constituencies, have asked the EC to establish a protocol for verifying the “burnt memory” or microcontroller of the four key components of the EVM – the control unit, ballot unit, VVPAT and symbol loading unit.
The petitioners argue that while the court mandated the verification of five percent of the EVMs in each assembly constituency by EVM engineers, the Election Commission has yet to issue a clear policy for this process. The petition claims that the existing standard operating procedure issued by the EC only involves basic diagnostic tests and mock polls, without addressing concerns over potential tampering of the “burnt memory”.
Dalal and Singla emphasised that their plea does not challenge the election results but seeks to establish a more transparent and reliable mechanism for EVM verification. Separate election petitions challenging the results are currently pending before the Punjab and Haryana High Court.
The petitioners have requested the Supreme Court to direct the Election Commission to complete the verification process within eight weeks. In the recent Haryana assembly elections, the BJP won 48 out of 90 seats.
Following the Maharashtra election, the Opposition has raised serious concerns about voter lists in the state. It claimed that voter names were deleted just days before the election. The opposition leaders accused the ruling BJP-led National Democratic Alliance (NDA) of poll rigging in both Maharashtra and Haryana to favor the government.
The INDIA bloc has consistently alleged that EVM tampering contributed to their defeat in Maharashtra, where the BJP-led Mahayuti coalition secured 235 out of 288 seats, while the Opposition MVA alliance won only 46. The Opposition has long claimed that the BJP manipulates the election process to achieve favorable outcomes.
However, Maharashtra라이브 바카라 Chief Electoral Officer S. Chockalingam, in a recent interview to the Hindustan Times, firmly dismissed the widespread allegations of EVM tampering and claims of malfunctioning machines in the state라이브 바카라 elections.
He explained that EVMs are tamper-proof, with their programming verified by a secure, unalterable chip. The machines consist of a control unit, a ballot unit and a Voter Verified Paper Audit Trail (VVPAT) for transparency. It is aimed at ensuring no possibility of manipulation, such as connection to Wi-Fi or Bluetooth.
Chockalingam emphasised that the entire electoral process, from voting to vote counting, is secure and transparent. Once a voter casts a vote, the symbol is displayed on the VVPAT and the EVM records the total votes at the end of the day. The results are only revealed when the ‘result’ button is pressed during counting. He also clarified that candidates can request verification of the EVMs, which follows a procedure in line with Supreme Court directives.
Addressing concerns about new voter registrations, Chockalingam explained that new voters are registered annually, with multiple deadlines now in place.
Regarding viral videos claiming skewed voter numbers, especially instances of candidates receiving zero votes in their areas, Chockalingam dismissed these allegations as false. He also clarified that the voting patterns, including a rise in votes during the final hour, were normal, noting that people in Maharashtra often vote later in the day.
Inputs from PTI