Madras High Court on Thursday cautioned that it will dismiss the missing person case against Jaggi Vasudev’s Isha Foundation if the petitioner, who moved the Court alleging disappearance of his brother, does not appear in court for hearing.
- News
- Columns
- Interviews
- Law Firms
- Apprentice Lawyer
- Legal Jobs
- हिंदी
- ಕನ್ನಡ
Madras High Court says it will dismiss missing person case against Isha Foundation if petitioner doesn’t appear
The Tamil Nadu police asked the Court to grant it additional time to file a status report in the case. The matter will be heard further on June 7.
Madras High Court and Jaggi vasudevJaggi vasudev – Facebook
Published on:
18 Apr 2024, 3:39 pm
2 min read
The Madras High Court on Thursday cautioned that it will dismiss the missing person case against Jaggi Vasudev’s Isha Foundation if the petitioner, who moved the Court alleging disappearance of his brother, does not appear in court for hearing.
The bench noted that the petitioner in the case, C Thirumalai, who had filed the Habeas Corpus petition after his brother went missing, was not present in the Court for the day’s hearing.
It then posted the matter for further consideration on June 7 while making it clear that it would be the last chance for the petitioner to appear.
Meanwhile, the Tamil Nadu Police Thursday told the Court that it was investigating the case.
The Police sought more time to file a status report in the case.
Additional Public Prosecutor E Raj Thilakavadi told a bench of Justices MS Ramesh and Sunder Mohan that so far, the State police had questioned 36 people including some employees and volunteers at the Isha Yoga Centre, but it needed some more time to file a status report.
Last month, the Tamil Nadu Police had told the bench that six people have gone missing from Isha Foundation since 2016.
The police had made the submission orally during the hearing on Thirumalai’s Habeas Corpus petition.
Thirumalai approached the Court after Ganesan, 46, went missing from Isha Foundation in March last year. He had told the Court that after he had been unable to establish contact with his brother for several days, he had contacted the Isha Foundation.
However, all that the Foundation had told him at the time was that his brother, who worked at the ashram, had not reported for two days. Following the same, Thirumalai lodged a police complaint and subsequently moved the High Court.
However, the police told the Court during the previous hearing that many who leave the Foundation, often did so on their own will.
Supreme Court hears plea to tally EVM votes with VVPAT slips: LIVE UPDATES
In the last hearing, the Court had asked the ECI whether there is any law providing for punishment of officials and authorities for manipulating EVMs.
Supreme Court, Electronic Voting Machines, Live Updates
Updated on:
18 Apr 2024, 4:53 pm
4:32 pm, 18 Apr 2024
Judgment reserved.
4:32 pm, 18 Apr 2024
Senior Advocate Sanjay Hegde :The country has come to know what has happened so far and the larger questions can wait for another day.. let the matter end here.
Another lawyer: Just 2 minutes.
4:31 pm, 18 Apr 2024
A lawyer points out the system in Bangladesh.
SC: Our system is working well, you know, and we know what happened with ballot papers. Our voters number has also increased and shows the faith which people have..
Justice Datta: Do not think only foreign countries are doing well.. India is also doing well.
4:31 pm, 18 Apr 2024
Bhushan: There is a point of dark opaque glass which was introduced.
SC: This has already been argued
Bhushan: Voter should be able to see the slip cutting and falling in box and counting the slip is also not time taking. Former CEC Qureshi in an interview had pointed out that ballot papers take less than two days to be counted so the slips can also be counted … This can be done in interest of voter confidence.
4:09 pm, 18 Apr 2024
Advocate Prashant Bhushan: There is some element of programming of symbol loading which happens in evm and it goes to VVPAT.. and if somebody writes a malicious programs then what happens is that.. it affects the VVPAT.. and that is why there is so much distrust about the VVPAT..
SC: Please confine yourself to the legal argument.
Bhushan: It is not possible for them to make out whether a malicious program has been fed into it or not.. The technician will also not know about it and thus a malicious program can be fed into it.
4:08 pm, 18 Apr 2024
Senior Advocate Gopal Sankaranarayanan: Section 177 of IPC does not lie here at all… Thus let them count the total number of VVPAT slips so that one knows that something is amiss or not.
4:04 pm, 18 Apr 2024
Gopal Sankaranarayanan: The problem is the minute the ballot unit is linked to VVPAT.. The VVPAT ceases to be an independent entity as the ballot unit is not connected.
Justice Khanna: Memory or the flash memory is in the controlling unit. Little bit computers, I know
Gopal Sankaranarayanan: No, it is in the VVPAT..
ECI: The system works on RS485.. The physical location is immaterial. All the three units are connected to a common bus.. When one unit sends a signal to another one, then the third unit does not get to know about it.
4:03 pm, 18 Apr 2024
Gopal Sankaranarayanan: They have admitted that the discrepancy is and due to human error.
SC: So Mr. Singh, we take that only once incident and no more..
Singh: Yes only one.. VVPAT slips with EVM matched in all cases.
4:02 pm, 18 Apr 2024
Senior Advocate Gopal Sankaranarayanan: The Kasaragode incident is a news report of a complaint by an election agent .. But now motives being added to us..
SC: We get it .. It is in press reports and you did not verify this.
Gopal Sankaranarayanan: It has been stated that there has been only one discrepancy so far..
4:01 pm, 18 Apr 2024
Advocate Stephens: The counting of the polls should be on a single day and hundred percent VVPAT counting is the need of the hour.
Senior Advocate Gopal Sankaranarayanan: We are not making allegations against the election commission. We also understood how it works but what we are highlighting is the doubt we have about the system and there are reasons for the doubt. We have said what all has been put up on site since 2019.. There is a huge discrepancy which cannot be explained by 17A and 17C.. When it is not put out in public domain.. We know the total number of votes polled.. So the total votes polled cannot exceed that..
Justice Datta: But it is just one incident..
Justice Khanna: Negative news gets more publicity.
4:01 pm, 18 Apr 2024
Advocate Stephens: The VVPAT and EVM count should happen simultaneously and the votes should be tallied. If there is discrepancy then it must be looked into. Hundred percent counting of VVPAT is the need of the hour.
4:00 pm, 18 Apr 2024
Justice Datta: We could not decide the petition due to work pressure but this is not filed in the anvil of elections.
Justice Khanna: People have the freedom to post their opinions on social media and they can do it.
3:59 pm, 18 Apr 2024
SC: After counting, units must be sealed with representatives of candidates..
SG Tushar Mehta: This happens on the anvil of elections.
SC: This was filed long back..
SG: Democratic choice of a voter is being made into a joke and after repeated reviews also it is happening. I have told my side that be ready for some planted articles or news reports.
SC: Please leave it, I do not think the voters will..
SG: Yes, they will not fall for it.. but there are planted articles.
3:59 pm, 18 Apr 2024
SC: Suppose there is any doubt about the software – can it get checked in the election petition?
3:31 pm, 18 Apr 2024
SC: We are not disputing it is fundamental right, but over suspicion is not working out here.
3:30 pm, 18 Apr 2024
Justice Khanna: Mr. Bhushan, whether it is transparent, translucent glass on VVPAT machine or bulb is there… you are taking it too far.. the bulb helps you see it that is all. Calculation is by the control unit every time vote is cast, the slip falls off and the total is verified by polling officer.
Justice Khanna: Now, everything cannot be suspected. You cannot be critical of everything. If an explanation is given, you must appreciate it!
Justice Khanna: Mr. Bhushan, there need not be any explanation.. If some improvement is brought, then why should they explain you till it is lawful? Whether to have bulb or not or the brightness, etc. is for them to decide.
3:30 pm, 18 Apr 2024
Justice Datta: You say from beginning it was dark opaque glass.. show us that in the affidavit..
Singh: I will show the part.
SC: But the ECI side say that this design part is not in petition.. then why did you argue that?
3:22 pm, 18 Apr 2024
SC: Software is not party specific but button specific so allocation of a button to a party is something the engineers won’t know.. So software has no connect with membrane data.. The main memory does not know .. it only knows the party symbol.
3:21 pm, 18 Apr 2024
Maninder Singh: Only 25 complaints were received under Rule 49A and all of them were found to be false.. Till date ballot papers of 38,000 was randomly selected and no single case of transfer of vote from candidate A to candidate B has been detected. The only error which may have happened is when the data of mock poll has not been deleted.
3:20 pm, 18 Apr 2024
Senior Advocate Maninder Singh: EVMs are standalone machines and they cannot be tampered with.. VVPAT can also not be tampered with. Human error cannot be ruled out in manual counting but it has been minimized
Supreme Court: I told them to have bar-codes will be humongous task.. They say machine can read barcodes and human element is moved out. Barcodes have proven to be very useful. Paper ballots has huge drawbacks and we do not want to even think about it.
3:13 pm, 18 Apr 2024
Maninder Singh: Now some commission report has been cited.. from here please see the step which was taken by the ECI .. technical and administrative set up is there..all checks are carried out in presence of political party representatives.
3:13 pm, 18 Apr 2024
Maninder Singh: Mr Bhushan has cited that one example of one vote being counted extra which has already been explained and accepted (kasergode)
3:12 pm, 18 Apr 2024
Sr Adv Maninder Singh cites petitions which have been filed across the country with similar prayers but dismissed by the concerned High courts.
Singh: MP HC had held that such allegations were made in abstract and the prayers here milord are based on false data..
3:11 pm, 18 Apr 2024
Maninder Singh: please see page 23 of the counter affidavit which reproduces the prayer which was earlier rejected before this court and again filed before the Gujarat High Court where it sought to count vvpat slips mandatorily alongwith evm votes and the hc dismissed it by a speaking judgment
3:11 pm, 18 Apr 2024
Sr Adv Singh cites precedents to support his case
2:50 pm, 18 Apr 2024
SC: as far as misconduct of polling officer is concerned then there must be some punishment.. it is a serious thing. any officer not complying with the mandate will be a very serious thing.
Singh cites a provision of Representation of Peoples act
SC: Yes that is a fine of Rs 500..
2:43 pm, 18 Apr 2024
SC: What is the provision with regard to penalty for possible misuse of the EVMs?
Maninder Singh: yes i am coming to that
2:43 pm, 18 Apr 2024
Maninder Singh: Efficacy of the EVM system is the continuing thread. media buildup does not impact the court.. but it impacts the common man..
2:42 pm, 18 Apr 2024
Maninder Singh: Voter turnout app is not in question before the court at all ..it has nothing to do with EVMs
SC: If it brings trouble then why continue it only..
Maninder Singh: from subhramaniam swamy to Chandrabhabu naidu to kamal nath.. they are also voters.. they are politician taking care of their constituencies
SC: if one voter wants the system and other does not want.. then what to do.. there is a risk of possible misuse of the VVPAT slips as to how he uses it
2:41 pm, 18 Apr 2024
Sr Adv Maninder Singh: there was an app where there was a discrepancy on the voter turnout… that app was in question.. this is the report submitted to parliamentary standing committee is all about.. there have been technical expert committees from time to time.. integrity of the EVM system is in question here.
2:32 pm, 18 Apr 2024
SC: if two slips fall, will it be captured then itself ?
Sr Adv Maninder Singh: Yes
Sr Adv Singh reads the rules of ECI regarding mismatch
SC: So no mismatch so far as per you
Singh: 100 instances were cited but there was no mismatch.
2:25 pm, 18 Apr 2024
ECI: The Kasergode incident cited is not correct. It was a fault in a 2019 app as we cited and the data was not being updated synchronously. It has been worked on now and there are no errors
Justice Khanna: Okay
2:24 pm, 18 Apr 2024
SC: in a polling station how many EVMs are installed? you said one.. but in Delhi we see there are number of EVMS..
ECI: That is because the number of candidates can be more..
SC: in delhi when we go the compartments and rooms are more
ECI: There can be multiple polling booths in one station..
SC: 50 percent polling booth have cameras
2:22 pm, 18 Apr 2024
Sr Adv Maninder Singh: the apprehensions cast cannot be mathematical. the prayer in the plea for ballot paper voting is a retrograde suggestion and the principle of stare decisis applies. No request can be entertained once that issue has been decided.. it is answered that there is proper check and balance system and there is representation by the candidates and party members.
2:18 pm, 18 Apr 2024
Senior Advocate Singh (for ECI): The allegations are based on the result of a machine which does not belong to the Election Commission of India at all. This uncertainty is not a nuisance to the democratic process itself. This indulgence being sought repeatedly… it has no basis.
2:17 pm, 18 Apr 2024
SC: For uploading symbols … some wire must be used.. But there seems to be some disconnect between what you are telling us and what is there in public domain.
ECI: There is nothing to hide.
SC: We also did not know and the safeguards put in place and the integrity of the machine put in place.. but there is a gap in what is in public domain and what is not in public domain.
Senior Advocate Singh (for ECI): The base on which the petition is filed is something which is not in existence.
2:16 pm, 18 Apr 2024
ECI: There is also an unauthorised access detection module. It is not connected with anything with outside world and anyone who tries to access the machine unauthorisedly, then the UADM alerts it and the machine gets back to factory mode and it cannot work anymore and has to be sent back to the factory. This is an additional safeguard.
2:16 pm, 18 Apr 2024
SC: In 2019, you found that there were some faults in the app..
ECI: It was not getting updated in a synchronous way.
SC: One thing is very clear, that it is possible for the polling officer to check total number of votes cast in the centralised unit.
ECI: Yes, only the total
SC: What is the data with regard to 17A registration etc.? What is the gap between the vote recorded in 17A and votes actually cast at the centralised unit?
ECI: No gap in 17A and 17C.. the relation is prescribed by the statute.
SC: We know there will be no mismatch because 17C is total we calculate on the basis of record in 17A and total number recorded in the control unit … But what is the difference between vote recorded in the two units?
2:14 pm, 18 Apr 2024
Hearing resumes.
SC: The returning officer is to upload the data.. and..
ECI: The section officer who supervises it can do it if the supervisor is busy
SC: It is collected from the 17A register? So it is possible for polling officer to check number of votes polled..
ECI: Only the total votes cast
1:04 pm, 18 Apr 2024
Senior Advocate Maninder Singh makes submissions for ECI.
Hearing to resume at 2 pm
1:04 pm, 18 Apr 2024
SC: When does the beep sound come?
ECI: When vote gets’ registered by control unit
SC: CU gives command to VVPAT and the beep sound will come the moment it gets registered
ECI: Beep is contingent on slip
SC: Is this not odd?
ECI: A censor is there which records slip has fallen
12:53 pm, 18 Apr 2024
Supreme Court: Are the votes time stamped?
ECI: Yes, each and every vote is timestamped.
SC: Suppose you find that there are 5-7 votes cast in a minute itself, do you take some action on your own then?
ECI: It cannot happen and we have not come across any such incident so far
12:51 pm, 18 Apr 2024
ECI: Entries are against the name itself.
SC: This list in 17A is made available to the candidates
ECI: No, it violates the secrecy of vote but on the next day of polling there is a process of scrutiny of 17A and it can be done in presence of everybody and it has at times led to re-poll.
12:49 pm, 18 Apr 2024
ECI: One, secrecy of voter and how he used it after one steps out, we don’t know and the case of deliberate mischief..
SC: What if we say 17A register should be matched with the votes polled in a booth and to ensure that 17A entries with respect to non-polling after one is registered as a voter is not made an academic exercise at the end of the day?
12:48 pm, 18 Apr 2024
Supreme Court: Look 5,000 to 7,000 is the figure.. so …
ECI: It takes one hour to count 1,000 VVPAT slips… A special cell is created which is 6 by 6 and then it is done.
SC: Paper is thin
ECI: Yes.. It is not meant for counting as such.. Takes roughly one hour and is done directly under the supervision of returning officer and done by a team who are specially trained.
SC: Can the voter get a copy of the slip? What are the harms that can happen?
12:43 pm, 18 Apr 2024
SC: Are there any instances of mismatch between data stored in ballot unit and the VVPAT slips?
ECI: Not a single mismatch found so far.
SC: How many VVPATs counted so far?
ECI: More than 4 crores?
Senior Advocate Gopal Sankaranarayanan: Their own document shows that there is a mismatch.. And now it cannot be said that there is no mismatch.. They can explain that one incident of mismatch as well.. They can say the morning mock poll was added by mistake
12:40 pm, 18 Apr 2024
SC: When you do manual counting.. you are doing of 5,000 – 7,000 votes.. yesterday we were told 1 lakh votes..
ECI: That is for assembly
SC: Why do you need 5 hours for that..? Also one suggestion was to have barcodes..
ECI: We have not examined it for now.. For this election it is not possible,
12:40 pm, 18 Apr 2024
ECI: 17A is not matched with EVM count. It is 17C… Total vote that should have gone into machine is 17A by doing adding subtracting etc..
SC: I am more concerned with… All knows community you belong to when you vote.. So I am saying nobody should be prevented from voting or one thinks that they voted but the vote is not cast.
12:37 pm, 18 Apr 2024
ECI: After counting it is always tallied with 17C and matches or not.
SC: We are told 1500 votes can be stored
ECI: 2,000 also
SC: But that is the CU memory… Machine has 1500
ECI: Due to roll limitation
SC: What about one person getting two votes?
ECI: That does not happen and can happen only if mock poll is not deleted.
12:36 pm, 18 Apr 2024
Supreme Court: Now, if there is a mismatch between 17A and 17C? How many mismatches can you identify?
ECI: In 17A, inbuilt correction is there.
SC: Should not entry under 17A be authenticated by polling officer every hour or so? The polling officer will know when a person goes inside booth but does not vote.
Senior Advocate Gopal Sankaranarayanan: That is NOTA
Supreme Court: No, no that is not.
ECI: That comes under 17C.
SC: 17C column will not record that.. It is only total number of votes. Also Mr Sankaranarayanan, discrepancy you pointed out yesterday was that number of persons entered in register and votes cast. Mismatch will not happen if power is used under Rule 49O.
12:30 pm, 18 Apr 2024
Supreme Court: How many votes can be polled in a minute?
ECI: Fifteen seconds needed for one vote.. so maximum four.. but due to human intervention.. it is less than four.
Supreme Court: It cannot be more than 4?
ECI: No. We also have EVM demonstration centre in a district and anybody can come and get educated about the machine.
Supreme Court: When we go to the polling station.. we give a slip.. our photo also there and we sign on a register.. there is a tick mark on the register.
12:13 pm, 18 Apr 2024
Supreme Court: When you do loading, are candidates allowed to do a test check?
ECI: Yes, a mock poll is conducted before machines are put in the strong room.. Candidates are allowed to pick up random machines and poll to check.
12:08 pm, 18 Apr 2024
Supreme Court: No interference with program memory?
ECI: It cannot be reconfigured… This is a firmware and between software and hardware. it cannot be altered at all..
Supreme Court: All the three units are mutually compatible?
ECI: Yes, there are no spurious mechanism also involved..after first randomisation the machines go to strong room of the assembly and put in lock and key in presence of political parties and they put whatever note they want to put.
12:07 pm, 18 Apr 2024
Supreme Court: How many VVPAT machines you have?
ECI: Total of 17 lakhs.
SC: Won’t they be equal to the EVMs.. ?
ECI: We specify the redundancy for operational purposes.
12:03 pm, 18 Apr 2024
Supreme Court: The SLUs are not stored to ensure that there is no tampering. etc.? Of course, very difficult.. SLU is done from the computers.. laptop etc used by returning officer.. The software by ECI has a lock in mechanism.
ECI: Yes, it is a secured software.
11:49 am, 18 Apr 2024
ECI: Control unit gives command to VVPAT to print it. It is visible to voter for seven seconds and it falls into the sealed box of VVPAT. Each control unit has four MB of memory.. Before 4 days of poll.. there is a commissioning process and in presence of all candidates the process is checked and engineers are also present.
11:45 am, 18 Apr 2024
Justice Dipankar Datta: This is an electoral process and there needs to be sanctity to it and let there be no doubt about it.
Justice Khanna: The symbol which is uploaded is uploaded in which unit
ECI officer: EVM system has three components, ballot unit, control unit and the third is VVPAT. Ballot is to press the symbol, control unit stores the data and VVPAT is for verification.
11:44 am, 18 Apr 2024
Supreme Court: Mr. Maninder Singh or an officer from ECI.. Someone explain to us the entire process … How VVPATs are calibrated.. What kind of officers are involved.. What sort of safeguards are there so that there is no tampering involved. They also relied on some standing committee report.. please focus on that as well. Regarding changes made to VVPAT or chips etc.. it is technical … but you can answer it.
11:43 am, 18 Apr 2024
Advocate Prashant Bhushan: There was a mock poll in Kasargode, Kerala. Four EVMs and VVPATs were recording one extra vote for BJP. Manorama carried this report.
Justice Sanjiv Khanna: Mr Maninder Singh please crosscheck it
11:17 am, 18 Apr 2024
Senior Advocate Sanjay Hegde: The court can consider safeguards to be put up for this election and consider other issues later since such petitions comes to be decided very close to elections.
Counting is immediately done and audit of it can take time. There should be a separate audit which would then add greater credibility to counting process also.
11:13 am, 18 Apr 2024
Advocate Prashant Bhushan: In the VVPAT machine the light remains on for seven seconds, if that light can be on always so that the voter can see the slip cutting and falling or other slip being cut, etc. also.. That can be done if the glass cannot be changed.
11:12 am, 18 Apr 2024
Advocate Nizam Pasha makes submissions: Voter secrecy is not compromised at any stage … Also my right to secrecy cannot …
Court: I hope you understand what you are arguing and the practical results of it
Advocate Pasha: Milord …
Court: If you still argue, then fine … the last slip will always be at the bottom … Do not take more time …
Advocate Pasha: It is the rights context in which this debate lies …
Court: You have applied the doctrine of proportionality
Pasha: Yes, the fundamental right to know for whom the vote is cast, right to free and fair elections, etc. … These are all rights of voters and it does not affect somebody else
Court: Tell us which are the four prongs of the doctrine of proportionality
Pasha: The doctrine comes when there are two conflicting rights.. I am a stage anterior to this …
Court: All fundamental rights can be curtailed on the basis of certain exceptions …
10:13 am, 18 Apr 2024
The Supreme Court is hearing a petition seeking that every vote cast through an Electronic Voting Machine (EVM) is tallied with Voter-Verifiable Paper Audit Trail (VVPAT) slips during elections.
Presently, VVPAT verification is done only for votes recorded in five randomly selected EVMs in each assembly segment.
The petitioner, lawyer and activist Arun Kumar Agrawal, has prayed that each and every EVM vote should be tallied against VVPAT slips.
The petitioner has also sought a direction that voters should be allowed to physically drop the slips generated by the VVPAT in a ballot box to ensure that the voter’s ballot has been ‘counted as recorded’.
The Court had sought the Election Commission of India’s (ECI) response in the matter on April 1, when the plea was tagged with other pending matters concerning EVM and VVPAT.
During the last hearing, the Court had asked the ECI whether there is any law providing for punishment of officials and authorities for manipulating EVMs.
At the time, a bench of Justices Sanjiv Khanna and Dipankar Datta had observed that unless there is fear of stringent punishment, there is always a possibility of manipulation taking place.
Live updates from the hearing today feature here.
Related Stories
Lok Sabha Elections: Madras High Court dismisses PIL to tally EVM votes with VVPAT slips
4 hours ago
Supreme Court asks Election Commission to look into allegation of EVM malfunctioning in Kerala
5 hours ago
Is there any punishment for tampering with or manipulating EVMs? Supreme Court asks ECI
16 Apr 2024
Supreme Court notice to ECI on plea to tally all EVM votes with VVPAT, deposit VVPAT slips in ballot box
01 Apr 2024
Everything can’t be suspected: Supreme Court reserves judgment on tallying of VVPAT and EVM votes
Solicitor General (SG) Tushar Mehta today told the top court that the repeated filing of petitions related to EVMs was turning the voters’ democratic choice a joke.
Supreme Court, EVM
Published on:
18 Apr 2024, 4:41 pm
8 min read
The Supreme Court on Thursday reserved its judgment on the petitions seeking directions to tally Voter-Verifiable Paper Audit Trail (VVPAT) slips with votes cast through Electronic Voting Machines (EVMs) during the elections.
A Bench of Justices Sanjiv Khanna and Dipankar Datta during the hearing today remarked that everything cannot be suspected and the petitioners don’t have to be critical about each and every aspect of EVM.
“If an explanation is given, you must appreciate it. Mr Bhushan, there need not be any explanation… If some improvement is brought then why should they explain you till it is lawful! Whether to have bulb or not or the brightness etc is for them to decide,” the Court told Advocate Prashant Bhushan, who represented one of the petitioners.
After another counsel representing the petitioners submitted that the question of fundamental rights was involved, the Court said,
“We are not disputing it is fundamental right but over-suspicion is not working out here.”
When a lawyer later pointed to the system in foreign countries like Bangladesh, the Court took an exception and said,
“Our system is working well, you know, and we know what happened with ballot papers. Our voters number has also increased and shows the faith which people have…”
Solicitor General (SG) Tushar Mehta also made arguments against the petitioners and said that the repeated filing of petitions related to the Electronic Voting Machines (EVMs) was turning the voters’ democratic choice into a joke.
He added that such petitions are filed only at the time of elections. However, the Court clarified that the petition had been filed earlier and it was the arrears before the Supreme Court which led to the delay in hearing the petitions and the petitioners cannot be faulted for the same.
“We could not decide the petition due to work pressure but this is not filed in the anvil of elections,” Justice Datta said.
With regard SG Mehta’s allegation of planted stories related to cases, the Court said.
“People have the freedom to post their opinions on social media and they can do it.“
Senior Advocate Gopal Sankaranarayanan, who represented one of petitioners, later submitted they were not making allegations against the Election Commission of India (ECI) but were only highlighting the doubts about the system.
Justice Sanjiv Khanna and Justice Dipankar Datta with Supreme Court
The Court was hearing a batch of petitions seeking a thorough count of Voter Verifiable Paper Audit Trail (VVPAT) slips in elections.
Among other prayers, the Court has been urged to order that every vote cast through EVMs be tallied with VVPAT slips, as opposed to tallying only a fraction of EVM votes (that are randomly selected) with VVPAT slips.
During the last hearing, the Court had asked the ECI whether there was any law to punish officials and authorities for manipulating EVMs, while orally turning down the option of going back to paper ballots.
Highlights of hearing today
Senior Advocates Sanjay Hegde and Gopal Sankaranarayanan and advocates Nizam Pasha and Prashant Bhushan were among the counsel who made submissions for various petitioners today.
Advocate Pasha asserted that voter secrecy would not be compromised by acceding to the petitioners’ request for enhanced VVPAT verification.
Responding to the Court’s queries regarding whether the petitioners have borne in mind the practical implications of their prayers, Pasha replied,
“Fundamental right to know for whom vote is cast, right to free and fair elections, etc. … these are all rights of voters and it does not affect somebody else.”
“All fundamental rights can be curtailed on the basis of certain exceptions,” the Court responded.
Senior Advocate Hegde suggested that the Court lay down some safeguards for the upcoming Lok Sabha polls, and deal with the remaining larger issues later on.
Alleged malfunction of EVM during mock drill in Kerala
Notably, Advocate Bhushan today drew the Court’s attention to a news article that allegedly reported on the malfunction of an EVM during a mock drill.
“There was a mock poll in Kasaragod, Kerala. Four EVMs and VVPATs were recording one extra vote for BJP. Manorama carried this report,” Bhushan told the Court.
The Court immediately asked the ECI, represented by Senior Advocate Maninder Singh, to cross check the allegation.
In the post-lunch session of the hearing, Senior Advocate Maninder Singh told the Court that reports on the EVM malfunction in Kerala were inaccurate.
The discrepancy noted was only due to an error earlier noticed in a 2019 application, the senior counsel submitted.
“The Kasaragod incident cited is not correct. It was a fault in a 2019 app as we cited and the data was not being updated synchronously. It has been worked on now and there are no errors,” Singh said.
No mismatch between EVM and VVPAT data on votes cast
During the hearing, Senior Advocate Sankaranarayanan registered objection to a claim by an ECI official that no mismatches have been noticed so far between data stored in ballot units and the VVPAT slips.
“Their own document shows that there is a mismatch … There is at least one instance of mismatch. Let’s not say there is no mismatch,” Sankaranarayanan said.
Senior Advocate Singh, however, stood by the ECI’s stance that there has been no instance of mismatch in poll data.
“100 instances were cited, but there was no mismatch,” Singh argued.
Singh also maintained that the petitions before the Court were baseless.
“The allegations are based on the result of a machine which does not belong to the Election Commission of India at all. This uncertainty is not a nuisance to the democratic process itself. This indulgence being sought repeatedly… (it) has no basis.”
What safety measures to ensure integrity of EVM votes?
During the hearing, the Court requested the ECI for an explanation on the working of VVPATs and other measures taken to ensure the integrity of votes cast during elections.
“This is an electoral process and there needs to be sanctity to it and let there be no doubt about it,” Justice Datta observed.
Among other aspects, the Court voiced concern over whether there are sufficient measures to ensure that Symbol Loading Units (SLUs) in EVMs are not tampered with.
“The SLUs are not stored to ensure that there is no tampering, etc.? Of course, very difficult … SLU is done from the computers … laptop, etc. is used by returning officer.. The software by ECI has a lock in mechanism,” the Court observed.
“Yes, it is a secured software,” the ECI assured, in response.
“When you do loading, are candidates allowed to do a test check?” the Court proceeded to ask.
“Yes, a mock poll is conducted before machines are put in the strong room.. Candidates are allowed to pick up random machines and poll to check,” the ECI replied.
The ECI official further disclosed the following aspects of the polling and checking process, in response to the Court’s queries:
- It takes about fifteen seconds to cast one vote, meaning that about four votes at most can be polled every minute. However, due to human intervention, less than four votes are usually cast per minute. The ECI has not come across any irregular case where more than four votes have been cast per minute.
- It is not possible for one person to cast a vote twice.
- There are inbuilt corrections to ensure that there are no mismatches between votes registered (Form 17A) and votes recorded (Form 17C).
- It is not possible to have bar codes for counting votes for the present round of polls (Lok Sabha polls 2024). No proposal for the introduction of such bar codes is being examined at present.
- There is no question of “hanging slip” in VVPAT machines. Unless the VVPAT slips and falls, the vote does not get registered. There is a sensor to ensure that VVPAT slip falls. A beep noise follows after the slip falls and the vote gets registered only upon this happening.
- Each and every vote that is registered is time-stamped.
Notably, the Court asked data on votes registered under Form 17A could be tallied with votes polled at the election booths, and not just at the stage of recording information under Form 17C.
“What if we say, 17A register should be matched with the votes polled in a booth, to ensure that 17A entries with respect to non-polling after one is made a registered voter is not made an academic exercise?” the Court remarked.
The ECI counsel pointed out that it may violate voter secrecy if the 17A register is shared with election candidates at the time of polling.
“On the next day of polling, there is a process of scrutiny of 17A and it can be done in presence of everybody and it has at times led to re-poll,” the ECI official added.
Is there a gap between ECI’s submissions and what is available in public domain?
As the Court took stock of all the security measures referred to by the ECI to ensure the integrity of the poll process, the Bench mused that all of these aspects do not seem to be well-known in the public domain.
“There seems to be some disconnect between what you are telling us and what is there in public domain,” the Court remarked.
“There is nothing to hide,” the ECI official assured.
“We also did not know and the safeguards put in place and the integrity of the machine put in place.. but there is a gap in what is in public domain and what is not in public domain,” the Court reiterated.
What action against misconduct of polling officers?
The Court also asked about penalty for possible misuse of the EVMs.
“As far as misconduct of polling officer is concerned then there must be some punishment.. it is a serious thing. Any officer not complying with the mandate will be a very serious thing,” the Court said.
The ECI counsel in this regard cited a provision under the RP Act. “Yes that is a fine of Rs 500…,” the Court then remarked.
Barcodes a possibility?
The Court during the hearing recalled that petitioners had suggested that each candidate be given a barcode along with the symbol so that when the VVPAT slips are counted, the machine itself does the counting with the barcode.
However, the Court remarked it would be a humongous task even if the petitioners say the use of barcodes would remove the human element.
The Court at this stage also said that paper ballots have huge drawbacks “and we do not want to event think about it.”
Complaints of EVM malfunction found false: ECI
The ECI also told the Court that only 25 complaints had been made regarding malfunction of the EVMs.
“Till date ballot papers of 38,000 was randomly selected and no single case of transfer of vote from candidate a to candidate b has been detected. the only error which may have happened is when the data of mock poll has not been deleted,” the ECI counsel told the Court further.
The three pleas before the top court concern the use of EVMs alongside VVPAT slips in elections.
One of the petitioners has prayed that each and every EVM vote be tallied against VVPAT slips.
Another plea filed by the Association for Democratic Reforms (ADR) said that VVPAT slips must be tallied with votes cast through EVMs so that citizens can confirm that their vote has been ‘counted as recorded’ and ‘recorded as cast.’
Tallying of VVPAT slips with EVMs has always been a subject of contention.
Before the 2019 Lok Sabha polls, leaders of around 21 opposition political parties had moved the apex court seeking VVPAT verification of at least 50 percent of all EVMs.
Back then, ECI used to tally only one random EVM per assembly segment with VVPAT.
On April 8, 2019, the apex court raised this number from 1 to 5 and disposed of the plea. In May 2019, the Court dismissed a plea filed by some technocrats seeking VVPAT verification of all EVMs.
NCLT grants one week to Byju’s and Teleperforance Business to settle debt dispute
Byju’s counsel informed the Bengaluru bench that it would try to resolve the dispute arising from default in payment of dues to the service provider.
NCLT Bengaluru
Published on:
18 Apr 2024, 4:17 pm
2 min read
The National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) at Bengaluru on Thursday granted a week’s time to Teleperforance Business Services India to settle its dispute with Think & Learn Pvt Ltd, the parent company of edtech firm Byju’s in relation to default in payment by the latter.
This came after Byju’s counsel, Senior Advocate Pramod Nair, informed the NCLT that it was trying to resolve the issue with Teleperformance, the creditor.
“We advise that the parties try and speak to each other and resolve this, we are fairly confident that we will reach a settlement and report to the tribunal”, Nair submitted.
A coram of judicial member K Biswal and technical member Manoj Kumar Dubey granted the parties a week’s time to attempt to reach a settlement.
It adjourned the matter to April 30.
If no settlement is reached by then, the Court will hear the parties finally.
The tribunal was hearing a petition by Teleperformance, the Indian unit of a French multinational company.
The plea was filed through King Stubb & Kasiva law firm.
The petition sought to initiate insolvency proceedings against Byju’s for recovering an amount of approximately ₹5 crores which Byju’s purportedly defaulted.
Teleperformance stated that the parties had entered into a service agreement on April 16, 2022.
There were 21 invoices raised between March 14 to end of August 2023 which had not been paid by Byju’s, it was claimed.
Byju’s raised no dispute in this regard and admitted to have defaulted in payments. It agreed to pay the required amount in several tranches – first tranche of ₹1.5 crore, second tranche of ₹2 crores and ₹2.2 crore as the final tranche of payment.
The edtech firm also claimed that a part payment of ₹1.5 crore was already made, which Teleperformance disputed.
Consumer court directs Thomas Cook to pay ₹3 lakh compensation for failure to provide visas, air tickets on time
It was the duty of the company to take care in advance to book the air tickets and obtain visa approval from the Embassy/Consulate well within the scheduled trip period, the Commission said.
visa
Published on:
18 Apr 2024, 3:18 pm
2 min read
The Additional District Consumer Dispute Redressal Commission at Bengaluru recently directed tours and travel company Thomas Cook to compensate a man with ₹3 lakh for failing to ensure visa approval and air tickets within the scheduled time, despite receiving payment. [Rudramurthy K v Thomas Cook]
Commission President B Narayanappa along with Members Jyothi N and Sharavathi SM noted that service was deficient on the part of the travel company.
“OP has failed to get the visas approved and air tickets booked well within the departure date which results in missing the London part of the tour to the complainant and his family which is nothing but deficiency in service on the part of the OP therefore, OP. is liable to compensation to the complainant and his family members apart from compensation OP is also liable to pay cost of litigation and interest.”
The complainant moved the consumer forum against Thomas Cook seeking compensation of ₹4 lakh, as well as ₹2 lakh for mental agony and injury and ₹50,000 for litigation expenses.
He had booked four tickets with the travel company to visit the United Kingdom and Europe in May-June 2023 as part of a tour.
However, he specifically alleged that the company omitted the main part of the tour, London, and concluded the tour within 12 nights and 13 days instead of the scheduled 14 nights and 15 days.
Additionally, the complainant claimed that the provided accommodation and food were not satisfactory.
The company contended that it merely facilitates visas and does not have control over the decisions made by the Embassy/Consulate regarding the release date of passports with visas.
The UK Embassy approved the visas only in the evening of May 24 last year, whereas the flight to London was scheduled for that morning. Consequently, the air tickets were rescheduled for May 26, and the family flew to Paris.
The company asserted that the London portion of the tour had concluded by then and appropriate arrangements were made for the remaining portion of the Europe trip, which the complainant’s family thoroughly enjoyed. As a gesture of goodwill, it reduced the rescheduling charges.
Taking into consideration the facts, the Commission noted that the cancellation of the London trip was beyond the control of the company. However, it was the duty of the company to take care in advance to book the air tickets and obtain visa approval from the Embassy/Consulate well within the scheduled trip period, it added.
Thereby, it allowed the complaint and directed the company to pay compensation of ₹2,00,000 to the complainant, along with ₹1,00,000 towards deficiency in service caused to the complainant and cost of litigation of ₹5,000 with interest @ 10% p.a. within two months from the date of this order.
Advocate Prashant T Pandit appeared for the complainant.
Advocate S Ramakrishnan appeared for Thomas Cook.
[Read Order]
Attachment
Rudramurthy K v Thomas Cook.pdf
Follow Us
- News⌄
- Interviews⌄
- Columns⌄
- Others⌄
- Law Firms⌄
