New Delhi: The Supreme Court Monday affirmed the Election Commission of India (ECI) guidelines on the first level checking (FLC) of EVMs and VVPATs, intended for use in the 2024 Lok Sabha polls. The apex court declined to entertain a plea by the Delhi Pradesh Congress Committee, questioning the procedure adopted by the ECI.
A bench led by the Chief Justice of India D Y Chandrachud said the court is not inclined to interfere with the Delhi High Court order in the matter. In August this year, the high court declined to entertain a plea challenging the “conduct” of the State Election Commission in relation to the first level checking (FLC) of electronic voting machines (EVMs) and voter-verified paper audit trails (VVPATs) ahead of the upcoming general election. The plea was filed by Delhi Pradesh Congress Committee chief Anil Kumar.
During the hearing today, the bench, comprising Justices J B Pardiwala and Manoj Misra, said now for the court to enter into this would completely delay the elections and “we don't want to enter into this….”. Kumar moved the apex court against the HC order.
The counsel, representing petitioner Anil Kumar, argued that the FLC process should be completed at least 90 days prior to the election and “they say they have done it for Delhi, Jharkhand and Kerala. For four-five states it is continuing and for other states, it has not commenced”.
The counsel said he sought unique identification numbers of these machines, “which you want me to participate in FLC”. The Chief Justice said the petitioner should have gone before the ECI and “Congress did not participate…..”. The counsel said it is not only Congress and no other party joined the process, and it is the Congress which came forward to say that it is willing to join. “You say other political parties did not join, it is an indicator that there is faith in the outcome….”, said the Chief Justice.
The bench said the High Court has gone at length into the detailed procedure which is laid down in FLC and the involvement of the political parties is one step into that process, and “it is not that if a political party does not attend the entire process comes under the cloud….”.
The counsel insisted that this involves a much larger issue, and “I went to them and they did not respond to my letter till the FLC was over…..the High Court failed to appreciate that the unique identification they are supplying me after the exercise is over and why they did not supply me before the exercise started?”
The Chief Justice said the court is not inclined to entertain the plea. The counsel urged the court to withdraw the petition. The bench dismissed the plea as withdrawn.
Also read: Not desirous of keeping land for Karnataka steel plant, will return 2,643 acres, ArcelorMittal to SC
Also read: Chief Justice D Y Chandrachud: More women as judges, a sign of changing times
