The Supreme Court on Thursday reserved its judgement on a batch of petitions seeking direction to the Election Commission and the Centre to ensure that voters can verify through Voter-Verifiable Paper Audit trail (VVPAT).
A bench comprising Justice Sanjiv Khanna and Justice Dipankar Datta after hearing all the parties for two days reserved its judgement.
Three petitions were filed including by the NGO Association for Democratic Reforms, praying that all VVPATs be verified, instead of the current practice of Election Commission to randomly verify 5 EVMs per assembly segment.
The petitioners also sought measures to ensure that votes are “recorded as cast” and “counted as recorded”.
The Bench asked the ECI to demonstrate how the EVM works and explain to the court its (EVMs) security features.
On the last hearing on April 16, the bench had categorically refused to accept that the EVMs should be done away with and the old system of ballot system should be resumed.
The Court had invited suggestions from all the parties on how the EVM system should be made more effective, and transparent so that there is no tampering with the Voting machines.
Advocate Prashant Bhushan suggested that the light in the VVPAT screen should be kept lit throughout the voting time (as opposed to the present practice of keeping the light lit for seven seconds) so that the voter can see the slip cutting and falling.
Advocate Nizam Pasha suggested that the voter be allowed to physically take the VVPAT slip and deposit it in the ballot box.
Senior Advocate Sanjay Hegde suggested that VVPAT is for ‘audit’, and all VVPATs should be counted even after the counting of the EVM votes, for an ‘audit’.
Senior Advocates Gopal Shankaranarayanan and Santhosh Paul also made submissions for the petitioners.
Solicitor General of India Tushar Mehta, said that such petitions were filed on the eve of elections to cast aspersions on the election system. It has an impact on the voter turnout.
The SG even went on to say, “I have told everyone on my side to be ready for some planted news or article for tomorrow as the petitioners are choosing a voter into a joke. This happens periodically on the eve of the election, Mehta said.
The Court after hearing the day-long arguments for the second day today, eventually reserved its judgement.
