Supreme Court Dismisses Proposal to Return to Ballot Paper, Raises Questions on EVMs and Counting Process

The Supreme Court, on Tuesday, dismissed the idea of reverting to the era of ballot papers and questioned petitioners who expressed doubts about the integrity of voting through Electronic Voting Machines (EVMs). The judges stated that they have not forgotten the issues that arose when votes were cast through ballot papers.

Justice Sanjiv Khanna, leading a two-judge bench, addressed Advocate Prashant Bhushan, who represented the petitioner-NGO Association for Democratic Reforms seeking 100% verification of EVM votes with VVPAT slips, saying, "Fortunately, we are now in our sixties. We have seen what used to happen earlier. Have you forgotten that? If you have forgotten that, I am sorry, I have not forgotten." Currently, 5 EVMs are randomly verified against VVPAT slips per Assembly segment.

When Bhushan wondered if the judge was referring to booth capturing, Justice Khanna responded, "Forget about booth capturing. What happens when ballot papers are… anyway. Let’s not enter into a debate."

Bhushan brought up the idea of ballot papers when the bench, also including Justice Dipankar Datta, asked him about alternatives to EVMs. "Earlier, there used to be ballot papers. There can be ballot papers. Most European countries have gone back to ballot papers," Bhushan said. He mentioned that the German constitutional court had ruled that EVMs cannot be trusted and, therefore, paper ballots should be used.

Rejecting the suggestion, Justice Datta said the conduct of elections in India is "a humongous task. Not possible for any European country to conduct. Let’s not draw analogies and comparisons from Germany and other countries. My home state West Bengal has more population than what Mr Bhushan said about Germany’s population. It’s a very small state… We have to repose some trust and confidence in somebody. Of course, they are accountable… But don’t try to bring down the system like this."

The bench also posed a series of probing questions on the operation of the EVMs and the process of storing them and counting the votes.

It also questioned the ADR's claim that "majority of voters don’t trust EVMs" and asked Bhushan about the source of this claim. Bhushan replied that it was a CSDS-Lokniti poll. "Poll! …Let’s not believe in these private polls," Justice Datta said.