Achi news desk-
Supreme Court
– Photo: ANI
expansion
The Supreme Court on Friday dismissed the petitions for 100 percent matching of EVM votes with VVPAT slips. A bench of Justice Sanjeev Khanna and Justice Dipankar Dutta said that blind skepticism in any system can create doubt towards any system.
The Supreme Court gave these instructions to the Election Commission
The bench said that “a balanced perspective is important. Blind skepticism in any system can create doubt towards that system. There is a need for significant criticism, be it the judiciary or the legislature. Democracy is about maintaining harmony and trust between all the pillars. By promoting a culture of trust and cooperation, we can strengthen the voice of our democracy. Along with rejecting the petitions related to the EVM, the Supreme Court also issued two directions to the Election Commission. According to the first directions, the Court said that after loading the election symbols in the EVM, the Election Commission should seal the election symbol loading unit and keep it in a safe place.These sealed containers should be kept in a secure storage room along with EVMs for 45 days after the declaration of election results.
EVM can be inspected on written demand of candidates
The court also ordered that after the constituency elections, the memory semiconductors in five percent of the EVM machines, including the control unit, polling unit and VVPAT along with the EVM, should be checked by the engineers of the EVM manufacturing company. Second and third candidates may be examined upon written request. This demand can be made within seven days of the announcement of the election results. The candidate demanding the clarification will have to bear his own cost and if the claim of EVM tampering is proven to be true, the election committee will have to return the cost to the candidate.
Petitions were filed in the Supreme Court demanding installation of VVPAT machines along with EVMs and 100 percent matching of EVM votes with VVPAT slips. At present, the matching of EVM and VVPAT is done only with all five EVM machines in each seat. Earlier, the Supreme Court said that it does not have the authority to control the elections and it cannot give orders to the Election Commission, a constitutional body. When lawyer Prashant Bhushan, who appeared in the Supreme Court on behalf of the NGO ADR, raised questions about EVMs, the court said in the last hearing that, ‘You have already decided, so we cannot help you with that. We are not here to change your thought process.
