NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court on Tuesday asked the Centre to spell out its stand on pleas seeking introduction of totalisers for counting of votes recorded in electronic voting machines (EVMs), a move aimed at protecting secrecy of ballot and preventing booth-wise profiling of voters.
A bench comprising CJI Surya Kant and Justices Joymalya Bagchi and V Mohana was hearing the PILs filed by advocate Ashwini Upadhyay, Yogesh Gupta and others, which sought that the election results be declared for an entire parliamentary constituency rather than revealing the booth-wise vote count from individual EVMs.
The pleas contended that the present practice of booth-wise counting allows candidates to ascertain voting pattern of each polling station and identify which locality voted against them, leading to intimidation, and violating secrecy of ballot.
The petitioners’ counsel said totaliser would club votes of 14 EVMs and give the combined result, so individual booth pattern cannot be ascertained.
He pointed out that Law Commission and Election Commission in 2008 had proposed a totaliser, but government has not amended rules.
The bench observed that secrecy is integral to fair polls. “If a candidate knows which booth did not vote for him, there can be adverse consequences for voters of that area. Secrecy is fundamental,” the CJI said.
The EC’s counsel submitted to the apex court that the poll panel had moved the proposal to the Centre in 2008 and 2014 seeking amendment to Conduct of Election Rules, 1961 for introducing totalisers, but the matter is pending.
The bench directed the Centre to file an affidavit indicating its stand. The court also asked the Centre to inform about consultations undertaken and logistical and financial implications. The matter will be heard again after four weeks.
Also in top court
SC to consider Centre plea on OBC criteria
The Supreme Court on Tuesday agreed to consider the Centre’s plea seeking clarification on applicability of its March 11 judgement on OBC creamy-layer criteria on candidates of CSE 2025. A bench of Justices PS Narasimha and R Mahadevan issued notice on the plea and asked parties to file their responses by September 17.
Response sought on judges retirement age
The Supreme Court on Tuesday asked states and UTs to consider enhancing the age of superannuation of judicial officers in the district judiciary to 62 years. A bench of Chief Justice Surya Kant and Justices Joymalya Bagchi and V Mohana said that enhancing the age of retirement would not create additional financial burden.
