Thaindian News

New Delhi, July 27 (IANS) The Supreme Court Monday refused to entertain a lawsuit by an election watch group doubting the credibility of the Electronic Voting Machines, which were used in the April-May general elections.
A bench of Chief Justice K.G. Balakrishnan, while rejecting the lawsuit, asked the petitioners to first approach the Election Commission of India on the matter.

The bench, which also included Justice P. Sathasivam and Justice Cyriac Joseph, however, gave the petitioners freedom to again approach the apex court if their grievances are not addressed by the poll panel.

Appearing for the election watch group, senior counsel Sanjay Parekh sought to impress upon the court that due to the growing political distrust against the EVMs it had become imperative for the court to set up a panel of experts to examine the functioning of the voting machines and ascertain whether they are tamper proof.

“All I want from this court is to set up a panel to examine the machines and then submit its report to this court,” Parekh pleaded, but the court refused to accept his plea.

The lawsuit was filed by two officials of a Hyderabad-based election watch group and two electronic engineers, who had contended that it was possible to tamper with the software of the machine and rig the election.

The lawsuit sought formation of a panel to examine the EVMs and decide if they needed to be improved or abandoned in favour of the ballot paper.

Election Watch official V.V. Rao and engineers A. Kankipati and Y. Vasaya contended in their lawsuit that “several experts and election watch groups and individuals, who have been monitoring the election process have found that EVMs could be manipulated and tampered with.”

“They have analysed the results in several constituencies, which indicates that there is something drastically wrong with the EVMs,” the petitioners claimed.

The lawsuit also raised the issue of secrecy of the votes, pointing out that EVMs are not able to even protect the secrecy of voters and the votes cast by them.

Arguing for formation of an expert panel, Parekh contended that two expert panels appointed by the Election Commission in 1990 and 2005 had indicated that there were several lacunae in the functioning of EVMs and they needed to be rectified.

Later, speaking to IANS, Election Commission’s legal consultant S.K. Mendiratta sought to refute the doubts being raised about the EVMs.

“We have been writing to one and all, who have been raising doubts about the EVMs, to approach the Election Commission and demonstrate to us how the EVM could be tampered with,” said Mendiratta, who was former principal secretary of the poll panel.

“No one has turned up till now to ask for any demonstration,” he said, adding that at least three high courts and the apex court have approved of the EVMs’ functional authenticity.