Supreme Court asks ECI why info on total votes polled cannot be put on website within 48 hours

The Supreme Court on Friday asked the Election Commission of India (ECI) to respond to a plea seeking disclosure of final authenticated data of voter turnout in all polling stations including the number of votes polled in the Lok Sabha Elections 2024 within 48 hours of the polling..A Bench of Chief Justice of India (CJI) DY Chandrachud and Justices JB Pardiwala and Manoj Misra asked the ECI counsel, Amit Sharma ,what the difficulty was in putting up the voter turn out details on its website."Mr. Sharma what is the difficulty to put it on the website," CJI Chandrachud asked."It takes time. We have to collect a lot of data," the ECI counsel said."But every polling officer submits data on the app by evening ? So returning officer has data of full constituency by the end of the day," the Bench asked."Not immediately," the ECI counsel responded."Okay, the next day," the CJI replied.The Court eventually directed the ECI to file its reply within a week, and posted the case for consideration next on May 24..The application was filed in light of the recent controversy surrounding the substantial increase in the final voter turn out announced by the ECI for the first two phases of the ongoing Lok Sabha elections as compared to initial estimate announced on the voting day.The application highlighted that the data published on April 30 showed a sharp increase (by about 5-6%) of final voter turn out as compared to the initial percentages announced by ECI on the day of polling.This coupled with the delay in announcing the voter turn out has led to concerns among voters and political parties about the correctness of such data.The application was moved by the Association for Democratic Reforms (ADR) in a 2019 case. The application has sought directions to the ECI to upload scanned, legible copies of Form 17C Part-I (Account of Votes Recorded), on its website.The data should be uploaded after each phase of polling in the ongoing 2024 elections and must provide constituency and polling station-wise figures of voter turnout in absolute numbers and in percentage form, the application stated.Additionally, ADR sought disclosure of the Part- II of Form 17C which contains the candidate-wise result of counting after the compilation of results.ADR alleged that there has been a dereliction of duty on the part of the ECI in declaring election results through Electronic Voting Machines (EVMs) based on accurate and indisputable data.To bolster this contention, ADR submitted that so far, the voter turn out data published by the ECI on April 30 was 11 days after the first phase and 4 days later for the second phase.The delay, coupled with the high revision rate and the absence of disaggregated constituency and polling station figures in absolute numbers has raised concerns and public suspicion regarding the correctness of the said data, the application stated.It was ADR's argument that in view of these developments it is necessary to direct the ECI to disclose the data within 48 hours after polling is closed, so that voters' confidence does not erode any further..During the hearing today, advocate Prashant Bhushan, appearing for ADR, said that the ECI must disclose the absolute number of votes polled.The ECI counsel Amit Sharma opposed the plea and also questioned the locus of ADR."We do everything transparently. How is the petitioner aggrieved, not the candidate," Sharma demanded."Citizens are aggrieved," Bhushan said. .Senior Counsel Maninder Singh, also appearing for ECI, said that the allegations in the plea are totally false and another Bench of Justices Sanjiv Khanna and Dipankar Datta had already dealt with all issues concerning Electronic Voting Machines (EVMs) in detail in a recent judgment. "This is an absolutely false allegation. Justice Khanna and Datta had dealt with it in detail. Honourable court already looked at Manorama article that was found to be false. So many elections have taken place since this petition was filed," he said.Bhushan, however, said that the issues raised in the present plea were different from the ones decided by the Bench of Justice Khanna..Vested interest groups undermining nation's achievements: Justice Dipankar Datta in EVM judgment."You cannot raise form 17 (issue) here ... So many phases of elections are done. But this is completely false. This is not the time, with utmost respect," Singh maintained.However, the Bench said that it would be unfair to not hear the plea. "You can file a short reply Singh. That is not fair. This Court will sit till late if needed. If you do not want to file a reply then ... Since it is an IA we must give them an opportunity to respond," the Bench said.It then asked ECI to respond to the plea within a week."We grant a week's time. List before concerned bench on May 24," the Bench directed. "Not that we are scared," Maninder Singh said as the hearing drew to a close..Follow Bar and Bench channel on WhatsAppDownload the Bar and Bench Mobile app for instant access to the latest legal news.