With the Supreme Court of India having observed in the batch of petitions filed under Writ Petition (Civil) No. 434 of 2023 & Ors. on 26.04.2024, that:
“In the Indian context, keeping in view the vast size of the Indian electorate of nearly 97 crore, the number of candidates who contest the elections, the number of polling booths where voting is held, and the problems faced with ballot papers, we would be undoing the electoral reforms by directing reintroduction of the ballot papers.” (Justice Sanjiv Khanna).
According to Liu and Wang (2017) in their research article entitled: An E-voting Protocol Based on Blockchain:
“Electoral integrity is essential not just for democratic nations but also for state voter’s trust and liability. Political voting methods are crucial in this respect. From a government standpoint, electronic voting technologies can boost voter participation and confidence and rekindle interest in the voting system.” (Liu & Wang, 2017).
Subsequently, according to Shahzad and Crowcroft (2019) in their research article entitled: Trustworthy Electronic Voting Using Adjusted Blockchain Technology published in the IEEE Xplore Journal, with respect to efficacy of the Voting System, it has been expressed that:
“The efficacy of such a procedure is determined mainly by the level of faith that people have in the election process. The creation of legislative institutions to represent the desire of the people is a well-known tendency...Over the years, the vote has become the primary resource to express the will of the citizens by selecting from the choices they made.”
It would be interesting to note that the WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) NO. 434 OF 2023 which was filed before the hon’ble Supreme Court of India seeking to invoke the Extra-Ordinary Original Jurisdiction of the Apex Court, sought the following prayers which can be easily assimilated from a bare reading of the judgment dated: 26.04.2024:
“3. On a pointed question put by the Court, it was argued, without prejudice and in the alternative, on behalf of the petitioner – Association for Democratic Reforms, that the Court should direct:
a) return to the paper ballot system; or
b) that the printed slip from the Voter Verifiable Paper Audit Trail machine be given to the voter to verify, and put in the ballot box, for counting; and/or
c) that there should be 100% counting of the VVPAT slips in addition to electronic counting by the control unit.” (SANJIV KHANNA, J., p. 2 of 38).
While the judgement of the Supreme Court has endeavoured to uphold the integrity of implementing the EVM system, the Apex Court did not flinch from discussing the journey of the electoral reforms from which the present ratio decidendi now emanates.
The two judge bench of Justices Sanjiv Khanna and Dipankar Datta, at paragraph 8 in Writ Petition (Civil) No. 434 of 2023 of the Supreme Court, discussed the decision of Subramanian Swamy v. Election Commission of India (2013) 10 SCC 500, wherein it was held that a paper trail was an indispensable requirement of free and fair elections. The relevant portion of the judgment is reproduced below:
“28. From the materials placed by both the sides, we are satisfied that the ‘paper trail’ is an indispensable requirement of free and fair elections. The confidence of the voters in the EVMs can be achieved only with the introduction of the “paper trail”. EVMs with Vvpat system ensure the accuracy of the voting system.” (Subramanian Swamy v. Election Commission of India, 2013).
Chronologically, the two judge bench in Writ Petition (Civil) No. 434 of 2023, also discussed the findings in a 2019 Judgment of the Court in N. Chandrababu Naidu and Others v. Union of India and Another (2019):
At paragraph 11: Justice Sanjiv Khanna observed that “the petitioners prayed that 50% randomised VVPAT slip verification be conducted in every General and Bye Elections instead of one EVM per assembly constituency or assembly segment in a parliamentary constituency. This Court held as under:”
“10. Having considered the matter, we are of the view that if the number of EVMs in respect of which Vvpat paper slips is to be subjected to physical scrutiny is increased from 1 to 5, the additional manpower that would be required would not be difficult for the ECI to provide nor would the declaration of the result be substantially delayed. In fact, if the said number is increased to 5, the process of verification can be done by the same team of polling staff and supervisors/officials.” (N. Chandrababu Naidu and Others v. Union of India and Another, 2019).
In order to further demonstrate the stringency of the Electronic Voting procedure, the Judgment in Writ Petition (Civil) No. 434 of 2023, has also highlighted the following observation at paragraph:
“61. During the course of hearing, our attention was drawn to Rule 49MA which permits an elector to raise a complaint regarding the mismatch between the name and symbol of the candidate shown on paper slip generated by the VVPAT and the vote cast on the ballot unit. Such elector is required to make a written declaration to the presiding officer. There have been 26 such cases in which the electors have complained under Rule 49MA. There is not even a single case in which any mismatch or defect was found.”
Accordingly, the Judgment in Writ Petition (Civil) No. 434 of 2023, has directed that:
“76. Nevertheless, not because we have any doubt, but to only further strengthen the integrity of the election process, we are inclined to issue the following directions:
(a) On completion of the symbol loading process in the VVPATs undertaken on or after 01.05.2024, the symbol loading units shall be sealed and secured in a container. The candidates or their representatives shall sign the seal. The sealed containers, containing the symbol loading units, shall be kept in the strong room along with the EVMs at least for a period of 45 days post the declaration of results. They shall be opened, examined and dealt with as in the case of EVMs.
(b) The burnt memory/microcontroller in 5% of the EVMs, that is, the control unit, ballot unit and the VVPAT, per assembly constituency/assembly segment of a parliamentary constituency shall be checked and verified by the team of engineers from the manufacturers of the EVMs, post the announcement of the results, for any tampering or modification, on a written request made by candidates who are at SI.No.2 or Sl.No.3, behind the highest polled candidate.” (Justices Sanjiv Khanna and Dipankar Datta).
It can thus be inferred that the Supreme Court of India has reposed faith in the EVMs for the unfettered advancement of Indian Democracy.
