In conclusion, the latest Supreme Court judgment on EVMs and VVPATs sets a precedent regarding the threshold for legal challenges to India's voting system, emphasizing the importance of substantive evidence and conclusive resolutions to maintain electoral integrity.
SC Explains: How in Future Res judicata May Apply on Writs Questioning Fairness of EVMs?
Total Views :
1,393
New Delhi (ABC Live): On April 26, 2024, the Supreme
Court of India issued its judgment regarding the verification of votes using the Voter Verified Paper Audit Trail (VVPAT) alongside Electronic Voting Machines
(EVMs). Justices Sanjiv Khanna and Dipankar Datta of the Apex Court dismissed
all pleas seeking 100% verification of votes cast through EVMs with VVPAT. The
decision was announced on the same day as the commencement of the second phase
of the 2024 General Elections.
The judgment referenced previous cases related to EVMs
and VVPATs, including Subramanian Swamy v. Election Commission of India and N.
Chandrababu Naidu v. Union of India, to establish the context for their ruling.
Justice Sanjiv Khanna based his judgment on technological and legal precedents,
citing the need for credible evidence to challenge the existing electoral
system.
Justice Dipankar Datta focused on the principles of
Res Judicata and the maintainability of writs, emphasizing that mere
suspicion of EVM malfunction was insufficient grounds for legal action without
tangible evidence of malice, arbitrariness, or breach of law. The judgment
underscored the importance of not disrupting the electoral process without substantial
proof of wrongdoing.
Furthermore, the ruling addressed the issue of Res
Judicata, stating that challenges to the efficacy of EVMs must present new and
distinct grounds to justify revisiting the matter. The Court emphasized the
need for conclusive resolutions to such issues and cautioned against regressive
measures that could undermine the electoral process.
In conclusion, the latest Supreme Court judgment on EVMs and VVPATs sets a precedent regarding the
threshold for legal challenges to India's voting system, emphasizing the
importance of substantive evidence and conclusive resolutions to maintain
electoral integrity.
Justice Sanjiv Khanna in his judgment took up the issue
of earlier judgments of EVM/VVPATs wherein he referred following cases:
Subramanian Swamy v. Election
Commission of India
N. Chandrababu Naidu and Others
v. Union of India and Another
Nyaya
Bhoomi and Another v. Election Commission of India
Tech
for All v. Election Commission of India
Prakash Joshi v. Election
Commission of India
Madhya Pradesh Jan Vikash Party
v. Election Commission of India
Sunil Ahya v. Election
Commission of India
