Begin typing your search above and press return to search.
proflie-avatar
Login
exit_to_app
Break up or get dissolved
access_time 4 Nov 2024 4:01 AM GMT
Through oneness to autocracy
access_time 2 Nov 2024 4:58 AM GMT
In football too racism rules the roost
access_time 1 Nov 2024 4:26 AM GMT
The concerns raised by the census
access_time 31 Oct 2024 7:49 AM GMT
exit_to_app
Homechevron_rightIndiachevron_rightClarification on...

Clarification on functioning of EVMs sought by SC; calls poll panel official at 2 pm

text_fields
bookmark_border
Clarification on functioning of EVMs sought by SC; calls poll panel official at 2 pm
cancel

New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Wednesday called a senior poll panel official at 2:00 pm and sought clarification from the Election Commission on a few points pertaining to how Electronic Voting Machines (EVMs) operate.

A bench made up of Justices Sanjiv Khanna and Dipankar Datta has reserved ruling on a number of pleas requesting full cross-verification of votes cast using electronic voting machines (EVMs) with voter-verifiable paper audit trail (VVPAT). The bench stated that it requires clarification on a few points because the EC's "frequently asked questions" (FAQs) on EVMs left some questions unanswered.

"We don't want to be wrong but doubly sure in our findings and hence we thought of seeking the clarification," the bench told Additional Solicitor General Aishwarya Bhati who was appearing for the EC.

It asked Bhati to call senior Deputy Election Commissioner Nitesh Kumar Vyas at 2 PM.

Vyas had earlier given a presentation to the court on the functioning of the EVMs.

It flagged some points on which the court wanted clarification which relates to storage of EVMs, microchips in the controlling unit of EVMs and other aspects.

The VVPAT is an independent vote verification system which enables electors to see whether their votes have been cast correctly.

On April 18, the top court had reserved its verdict on the batch of pleas.

The bench further heard the plea by Advocate Prashant Bhushan, counsel for the petitioner Association for Democratic Reforms, and oraly opined that the court could not control the polls, nor could it act on mere suspicion.

Responding to concerns raised by Bhushan the court said, "If you are predisposed about a thought-process, then we cannot help you... we are not here to change your thought process."

The court reserved judgement in the case as of now.

(With PTI inputs)

Show Full Article
TAGS:Supreme Court#ECIEVMs
Next Story