The Supreme Court is likely to deliver its verdict on Wednesday, meaning today on petitions seeking to verify all votes using EVMs with Voter Verifiable Paper Audit Trail (VVPAT). Before delivering the verdict, the court sought some clarification from the Election Commission of India on this matter. Also, a clerk was asked to appear today at 14:00 at the court and answer some questions.
Let us tell you, the bench of Justice Sanjeev Khanna and Justice Dipankar Dutta reserved the decision on April 18. Considering the supreme importance of voters’ satisfaction and trust in the electoral system, the Supreme Court told the petitioners during the hearing that nothing should be questioned.
In the last hearing, the Supreme Court told the Election Commission that there should be purity in the election process. The court asked the election commission to explain in detail the steps taken to ensure free and fair elections. A bench of Justice Sanjiv Khanna and Justice Dipankar Dutta said that this is an election process. It should have purity. No one should fear that all available options are not being done.
The ECI official who was present before the Supreme Court bench and discussed the petitions seeking to verify the VVPAT votes, explained about the working of EVMs and VVPAT. Before that, the Supreme Court condemned those who criticized the Electronic Voting Machine (EVM). The court said that conducting elections in the country is a big challenge, in such a situation the system must not be taken backwards. In its comment, the Supreme Court also mentioned the time when the elections were held by ballot and ballots were looted.
The Supreme Court said that
The Supreme Court made this observation while hearing the petition filed by the NGO ADR. In fact, the petition demanded that 100% cross-verification of the EVM votes be done using the VVPAT machine, so that the voter can know if he voted correctly.
The petition states that many countries in Europe have also returned to voting in ballot boxes using EVMs. In this regard, the bench of Justice Sanjeev Khanna and Justice Dipankar Dutta said that conducting elections in the country is a big challenge and no European country can do it.
Questions were asked to the election committee
The judge asked lawyer Manander Singh, appearing on behalf of the Election Commission, to provide all the information related to EVMs to the court, including all the information related to the working of EVMs and their storage. The court also asked the election commission’s lawyer what is the punishment provision for those guilty of tampering with EVMs?
What is the claim in the petitions?
The petitioner’s lawyer Prashant Bhushan argued that the directors of two state-owned companies Bharat Electronics Limited and Electronics Corporation of India are associated with the BJP. Another petitioner’s attorney claimed that after the 2019 general elections, a parliamentary committee found irregularities in the EVMs, but the election committee has not yet given any answer on the matter. During the two-hour hearing, many petitioners presented their positions to the court.
