Dismissing a significant petition concerning the country's electoral process, the Madras High Court refused to order the mandatory counting of 100% VVPAT (Voter Verifiable Paper Audit Trail) slips alongside Electronic Voting Machine (EVM) votes. In its verdict, the court stated that the Election Commission's existing system of random 5% VVPAT verification is entirely scientific, secure, and adequate. It observed that expressing distrust in the entire electoral process without concrete evidence or substantiated claims of irregularities is not appropriate for a democracy.
The petitioners argued that all VVPAT slips should be counted to instill absolute confidence in voters regarding the integrity of their votes. They claimed that the random counting of only 5% of VVPAT slips did not conclusively prove the absence of technical glitches or tampering in all machines. The petition sought to make manual counting the basis for the final result to eliminate any scope for doubt.
Citing landmark judgments by the Supreme Court of India, the High Court noted that the apex court had already heard this matter in detail and rejected the plea for 100% VVPAT slip counting. The court remarked that once the apex court has established a definitive legal precedent on the subject, the High Court cannot adopt a different stance on the same demand; judicial discipline requires the High Court to adhere to the Supreme Court's guidelines.
The court also highlighted that counting 100% of VVPAT slips would delay the declaration of election results by several days, leading to administrative challenges and the resurgence of complexities associated with the 'Ballot Paper Era'. The Election Commission's current system—under which VVPAT slips from five randomly selected polling booths in each assembly constituency are matched against EVM data—has proven to be highly accurate and error-free in elections held so far.
This decision reinforces the credibility of the electoral process and effectively puts to rest the recurring questions raised regarding EVM technology. The court's firm stance conveys the message that while demands for electoral reforms and transparency are welcome, they must be grounded in solid legal arguments and technical evidence rather than mere unfounded apprehensions. This will facilitate the smooth functioning of the Election Commission during upcoming elections.