Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 1, Cited by 0]

Supreme Court - Daily Orders

Yogesh Gupta vs The Election Commission Of India on 8 September, 2014

Bench: Kurian Joseph, Rohinton Fali Nariman

         WP(C) No.422/2014
                                                1

         ITEM NO.17                    COURT NO.1                 SECTION PIL

                              S U P R E M E C O U R T O F     I N D I A
                                      RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS

         Writ Petition(s)(Civil)       No(s).   422/2014

         YOGESH GUPTA                                              Petitioner(s)

                                                VERSUS

         ELECTION COMMISSION OF INDIA & ANR.                       Respondent(s)



         (with appln. (s) for impleadment)


         Date : 08/09/2014 This petition was called on for hearing today.

         CORAM :
                            HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE
                            HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KURIAN JOSEPH
                            HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN

         For Petitioner(s)         Mr. Yogesh Gupta, Adv.
                                   Mr. Raman K. Bhardwaj, Adv.
                                   Mr. Balbir Singh Gupta,Adv.


         For Respondent(s)

         UOI                       Mr. Abhinav Mukjerji, Adv.
                                   Ms. Kiran Bhardwaj, Adv. for
                                   Mr. B. V. Balaram Das,Adv.

         ECI                        Mr. Mohit D. Ram,Adv.


                         UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following
                                            O R D E R
Signature Not Verified

Having considered the matter for sometime, we Digitally signed by Rajesh Dham Date: 2014.09.09 18:39:27 IST Reason: are of the view that an affidavit needs to be filed by the Election Commission of India (for short, “Election WP(C) No.422/2014 2 Commission”) on the aspect as to why amendment to the Conduct of Election Rules, 1961 (for short, “1961 Rules”) is necessary to provide for use of “Totaliser” for counting of votes recorded in Electronic Voting Machines (EVMs) and whether or not under the existing Rules the Election Commission can issue instructions without amendment to the 1961 Rules in respect of the above subject.

An affidavit also needs to be filed by the Union of India to indicate if the observations made by the Election Commission in its communication dated 21.11.2008 addressed to the Secretary to the Government of India, Ministry of Law and Justice, Legislative Department to provide for use of “Totaliser” for counting of votes recorded in the EVMs are not in dispute then what is the hitch in amending the 1961 Rules as suggested by the Election Commission. The Government of India may also keep in view the subsequent communication of 18.11.2011 sent by the Election Commission in response to the Government of India's letter dated 08.11.2011 and examine the above aspect in light of Section 128 of WP(C) No.422/2014 3 the Representation of People Act, 1951 which provides for maintenance of secrecy of voting.

While we have directed the Election Commission and the Union of India to file the above affidavits, we are not oblivious to the fact that the Government of India has referred the subject matter of electoral reforms in its entirety to the Law Commission of India for consideration and examination of diverse issues including the use of “Totaliser” as suggested by the Election Commission.

The above affidavits shall be filed within four months.

List the matter thereafter.

    (RAJESH DHAM)                          (RENU DIWAN)
    COURT MASTER                           COURT MASTER