Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

xiv) It is manifest from the above that the EVMs were tampered and hacked by using corrupt practices at the instance of respondent No.1 KL,J in order to see that he is declared as elected candidate though the election petitioner was polled majority votes. Hence, the election petition is filed seeking the aforesaid reliefs.

5. Respondent No.1 - Returned Candidate filed his counter refuting the allegations levelled against him. He further contended as under:

It is only my allegation that EVMs were tampered at the Junior College, Dharmapuri, but there is no evidence as such. I have not given any written complaint against the storing of EVMs at Junior College, Dharmapur either to the Election Authority or the Election Commission. But, I have informed the District Collector/Election Authority and Returning Officer over phone. I have no record of two phone calls to show that I have complained to them. I have not made any effort to secure the call list at the time of filing the Election Petition, but if necessary I will procure it and file. It is true that in the Election Petition, I have not stated that the Returning Officer and Mr. Sarath have taken undue advantage of their official favour to cause benefit to the KL,J respondent No.1 and thereby materially affect the election as now stated in para 11 of my chief examination affidavit. The EVMs were tampered and hacked by the Assistant Returning Officer Mr. Venkat Reddy with the help of technicians. I have definite information about the said tampering. I have made a complaint to the Election Authority about the Assistant Returning Officer with regard to the tampering of EVMs. I have not filed copy of the said complaint in this election petition. In para 15 of my election petition, I have not mentioned about the involvement of Assistant Returning Officer and about the complaint given against him to the Election Authority/District Collector. It is my assumption that EVMs were tampered and manipulated when they were kept in Govt. Junior College, Dharmapuri since it is not a notified place. I or my election agent have not seen the said tampering and manipulation since we were not allowed to stay at Govt. Junior College, Dharmapuri."

iii) Referring to the above said table, the election petitioner would contend that the EVMs were tampered and hacked by using corrupt practices at the instance of respondent No.1 to see that he will be KL,J declared as elected candidate. He relied upon Ex.A4 - copy of report No.22 and Ex.A5 - copy of Form - 20, final result sheet, furnished by CW.1 - Returning Officer.

iv) However, during cross-examination, the election petitioner (PW.1) categorically admitted that the signature of the Returning Officer is there only at the last page of Ex.A4. Report No.22 is prepared and furnished by the Returning Officer based on the information furnished by the Polling Officers of each Polling Station. Report No.22 furnished by the Returning Officer which is final report shows the total number of votes as 1,65,209. He does not know there will be preliminary - 22 report and final - 22 report. The Returning Officer will be collecting information on phone from the polling officers about the number of votes polled and percentage of votes polled every hour. The Returning Officer after compiling the information received from the polling officers will display the same in the website. He has not stated in his election petition that the difference of 132 votes between the final result sheet and report No.22 is not explained.

xvii) During cross-examination, PW.1 himself admitted that the report dated 11.12.2018 of the Returning Officer regarding counting of VVPATs in four counting stations is correct and that Ex.A4 was furnished to him on 08.12.2018.

xviii) The election petitioner (PW.1) during cross-examination categorically admitted as follows:

"It is true that in the Election Petition, I have not stated that the Returning Officer and Mr. Sarath have taken undue advantage of their official position to cause benefit to respondent No.1 and thereby materially affect the election as now stated in para 11 of my chief examination affidavit. The EVMs were tampered and hacked by the Assistant Returning Officer, Mr. Venkat Reddy with the help of KL,J technicians. I have definite information about the said tampering. I have made a complaint to the Election Authority about the Assistant Returning Officer with regard to the tampering of EVMs. I have not filed copy of the said complaint in this Election Petition. In para 15 of my Election Petition, I have not mentioned about the involvement of Assistant Returning Officer and about the complaint given against him to the Election Authority/District Collector. It is my assumption that EVMs were tampered and manipulated when they were kept in Govt. Junior College, Dharmapuri since it is not a notified place. I or my election agent have not seen the said tampering and manipulations since we were not allowed to stay at Govt. Junior College, Dharmapuri."