INSIGHT-NET - FREE Online Tipiṭaka Research & Practice University and related NEWS through 
http://sarvajan.ambedkar.org 
in
 105 CLASSICAL LANGUAGES
INSIGHT-NET -FREE Online Tipiṭaka Research & Practice University through http://sarvajan.ambedkar.org 
in
 105 CLASSICAL LANGUAGES

Categories:

Archives:
Meta:
May 2017
M T W T F S S
« Apr    
1234567
891011121314
15161718192021
22232425262728
293031  
03/18/17
2170 Sun 19 Mar 2017 LESSON- E-FILING- INSTRUCTIONS FOR E-FILING REGISTRATION First time users of Supreme Court E-filing have to register him/her through the “Sign Up” option-http://www.hindustantimes.com/…/story-k0WRYaBWRPYaUI6HgzPDH… JUSTICE Karnan has taken the right decision to contact Ms Mayawati supremo of BSP on whom EVMs were tampered to to defeat the movement of the Chief Architect of our modern constitution Dr BR Ambedkar. Just because Ms Mayawati is a scheduled caste but working for the sarvajan samaj i.e., all societies and gave the best governance as CM of UP and ultimately the PM of this country, it was not tolerated by the brahmins in general and the chitpawa brahmins of RSS in particular. So they used the fraud EVMs to destroy the movement in general and the SC/STs in particular. Hence through a Techno-Politico-Socio Transformation and Econommic emancipation movement, there must be a demand to dissolve Central and state governments selected by these fraud EVMs and go for fresh polls with paper ballots.-
Filed under: General
Posted by: @ 6:46 pm
2170 Sun 19 Mar 2017 LESSON


First time
users of Supreme Court E-filing have to register him/her through
the “Sign Up” option

For
registering first time personal details such as Address, contact
details, E-mail Id etc., which are mandatory, need to be entered.

while “In-person” will create
his/her Login-Id through “Sign Up” option. 
Password needs to be entered thereafter. Login Id and password
will be created once the mandatory requirements are filled
properly.

After
successful login the “Disclaimer screen” appears on the
screen.

Clicking of “I
agree” button on Disclaimer allows the user to proceed
further, while “I decline” button sends the control
back to the Login screen.

After
successful login, the user can file the case electronically.

“New
Case” option allows the user to file a new case.

“Modify”
option allows a user to carryout changes to the already e-filed
case, provided the court fee payment option is not inv
oked.

Court fee can
be paid only through credit card.

Defects
associated with the e-filed case will be e-mailed to the
advocate/petitioner by the Supreme Court Registry.



http://www.hindustantimes.com/…/story-k0WRYaBWRPYaUI6HgzPDH…

JUSTICE Karnan has taken the right decision to contact Ms Mayawati
supremo of BSP on whom EVMs were tampered to to defeat the movement of
the Chief Architect of our modern constitution Dr BR Ambedkar. Just
because Ms Mayawati is a scheduled caste but working for the sarvajan
samaj i.e., all societies and gave the best governance as CM of UP and
ultimately the PM of this country, it was not tolerated by the brahmins
in general and the chitpawa brahmins of RSS in particular. So they used
the fraud EVMs to destroy the movement in general and the SC/STs in
particular. Hence through a Techno-Politico-Socio Transformation and
Econommic emancipation movement, there must be a demand to dissolve
Central and state governments selected by these fraud EVMs and go for
fresh polls with paper ballots.

The ex CJI Sathasivam who
committed a grave error of judgement by ordering that the EVMs could be
replaced in a phased manner on the suggestion of ex CEC sampath and as a
result all the governments must be punished.

They must be asked
to pay the entire Central Government budget to Mayawati as a fine and
all those who oppose reservation to deprive the economy of the
downtrodden to book under atrocities act and sent jails.

18
Karnan reaches out to Mayawati
To hold protests across country; BSP chief has promised support, says lawyer

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/…/articlesh…/57698723.cms
DGP, 100 policemen serve SC warrant, Karnan spurns it

Avatar
Right Response • a day ago

Where there is an allegation of discrimination based on caste,its in
order for SC to appoint a Panel of unbiased foreign Judges to hear the
case.No Caste Judge can render justice to a Dalit who is supposed to be
harassed by the Caste System.

http://www.hindustantimes.com/…/story-k0WRYaBWRPYaUI6HgzPDH…

Calcutta HC Justice Karnan calls judiciary corrupt, brings up old allegations against HC judges
india Updated: Mar 12, 2017 01:03 IST
HT Correspondent
HT Correspondent
Hindustan Times, Kolkata
Calcutta High Court
Calcutta high court judge CS Karnan stepped up his tirade against the
Supreme Court and his fellow judges on Saturday by releasing his written
allegations against two Madas high court judges. (Representative Photo)

Calcutta high court judge CS Karnan stepped up his tirade against the
Supreme Court and his fellow judges on Saturday by releasing his written
allegations against two Madas high court judges.

He alleged that
one had tampered records to get into service and amassed wealth through
unfair means while the other had raped an intern.

Justice Karnan
had made these allegations in 2013 and 2014. “I wrote to the chief
justice of Madras high court but no action has been taken against them. I
brought specific allegations against 20 judges. But while those 20 are
silent, a seven-member bench of the SC issued a warrant against me.
Today I openly admit that Indian judiciary is corrupt,” Karnan said at a
press conference at his residence .

“These seven judges don’t
know law. The SC did not apply mind. That’s why public confidence (in
the judiciary) is decreasing day by day,” he said.

Asked whether
he would appear before the SC on or before the deadline (March 31),
Karnan said “Why? For what purpose? This is a wrong order. It is out of
law.”

On Friday, Karnan had signed an order in front of the
media at his residence, directing the Central Bureau of Investigation to
“register, investigate and file a report before the appropriate court
of law under Article 226 read with Section 482 CrPC to prevent abuse of
process of any court….”

“I am a sitting high court judge. Any
place where I sit and pass an order becomes the court,” Karnan said.
Asked whether he had the power to issue a directive even to the
President, he however said: “I have humbly appealed to President. Who
can direct the President of India?” Later he changed the word “direct”
to “request.”

When he was asked whether the director general of
Bengal Police, who is supposed to execute the warrant, or the CBI had
got in touch with him, Karnan said, “Not so far.” One of his associates,
a lawyer of the Madras HC, said copies of Karnan’s order had been sent
to the CBI as well as the judges of the SC.

Asked whether it was
appropriate for a sitting judge to talk to the media, Justice Karnan
said, “It is a national issue. It should reach the people. Let there be
transparency. What’s the secret? Nobody takes a suo motu warrant against
a sitting judge.”


KOLKATA:
One hundred policemen led by the Bengal DGP had to retreat from Justice
C S Karnan’s New Town residence on Friday after the Calcutta high
court…
timesofindia.indiatimes.com

LikeShow More Reactions
Comment
Comments
  • JUSTICE
    Karnan has taken the right decision to contact Ms Mayawati supremo of
    BSP on whom EVMs were tampered to to defeat the movement of the Chief
    Architect of our modern constitution Dr BR Ambedkar. Just because Ms
    Mayawati is a scheduled caste but working for the sarvajan samaj i.e.,
    all societies and gave the best governance as CM of UP and ultimately
    the PM of this country, it was not tolerated by the brahmins in general
    and the chitpawa brahmins of RSS in particular. So
    they used the fraud EVMs to destroy the movement in general and the
    SC/STs in particular. Hence through a Techno-Politico-Socio
    Transformation and Econommic emancipation movement, there must be a
    demand to dissolve Central and state governments selected by these fraud
    EVMs and go for fresh polls with paper ballots.

    The ex CJI Sathasivam who committed a grave error of judgement by
    ordering that the EVMs could be replaced in a phased manner on the
    suggestion of ex CEC sampath and as a result all the governments must be
    punished.

    They must be asked to pay the entire Central
    Government budget to Mayawati as a fine and all those who oppose
    reservation to deprive the economy of the downtrodden to book under
    atrocities act and sent jails.

    18


    To hold protests across country; BSP chief has promised support, says lawyer
    thehindu.com


    http://www.sc-efiling.nic.in/sc-efiling/index.html









    INSTRUCTIONS 
    FOR  E-FILING REGISTRATION


    First time
    users of Supreme Court E-filing have to register him/her through
    the “Sign Up” option.


    Through
    “e-FILING” only Advocate-on Record and
    petitioners-in-person can file cases in the Supreme Court of
    India.


     Advocate
    option is to be chosen if you are an “Advocate-on-Record”,
    otherwise choose “In-person” option in case you are
    petitioner-in-person.


    For
    registering first time personal details such as Address, contact
    details, E-mail Id etc., which are mandatory, need to be entered.


    For
    Advocate-on-record, his/her code (Advocate-on-record code) will
    be “Login-ID”, while “In-person” will create
    his/her Login-Id through “Sign Up” option. 
    Password needs to be entered thereafter. Login Id and password
    will be created once the mandatory requirements are filled
    properly.

     

    After
    successful login the “Disclaimer screen” appears on the
    screen.


    Clicking of “I
    agree” button on Disclaimer allows the user to proceed
    further, while “I decline” button sends the control
    back to the Login screen.


    After
    successful login, the user can file the case electronically.


    “New
    Case” option allows the user to file a new case.


    “Modify”
    option allows a user to carryout changes to the already e-filed
    case, provided the court fee payment option is not inv
    oked.


    Court fee can
    be paid only through credit card.


    Defects
    associated with the e-filed case will be e-mailed to the
    advocate/petitioner by the Supreme Court Registry.



    Note:- Petitions filed through E-MAIL are not entertained. For Electronic filing of
    case in Supreme Court. Use E-Filing facility only. Payment of Fee for E-Filed
    case are accepted only through Credit Cards and Debit Cards of the following
    banks mentioned below:

    Andhra Bank Axis Bank Limited Barclays Bank Plc Canara Bank
    City Union Bank Ltd. Corporation Bank Deutsche Bank AG GE Money Financial Services Ltd.
    HDFC Bank Ltd. ICICI Bank Ltd. Also for Mastercard debit cards (Only on
    ICICI PG)
    Indian Overseas Bank Kotak Bank-Virtual card
    Standard Chartered Bank State Bank of India Syndicate Bank The Federal Bank Ltd.
    The Karur Vysys Bank Ltd.      













    For further assistance, “Help” option is
    available.

    FAQ….

    Click
    Here to Proceed…
    .

     

    INSTRUCTIONS 
    FOR  AVAILING ORDER / DOCUMENTS


    Note dated
    25-06-07 of Ld. Registrar regarding providing of certified copy
    of order through post and charges thereof.

    Whenever any
    person /party concerned sends application by post or through
    e-mail for issuance of certified copy of order/document etc.
    first of all charges are calculated as the details given below


     

     

    1. Folio(per
    page) 

    2.
    Certification charges 

    3. Urgency
    charges

    4. Postal
    charges(minimum)by Regd. Post

    5. Third party

     

     

    Rs.1/-

    Rs.10/-

    Rs.5/-

    Rs.22/-

    Rs.5/-

     


     

    After the
    calculation of amount according to the number of pages of
    particular order plus other charges as mentioned above, the party
    concerned is informed by post or e-mail(if e-mail id is mentioned
    in his application)to send the charges by the way of “Money
    Order” in favour of Assistant Registrar(Copying). On receipt
    of amount, Court fee is purchased and affixed at the application
    and certified copy of order, as requested, is dispatched by Regd.
    Post only at the address mentioned in the application.


     

     

    IN THE
    SUPREME COURT OF INDIA


    CIVIL
    APPELLATE JURISDICTION


    CIVIL
    APPEAL NO.**** OF 2017

    (Arising
    out of SLP (Civil) No. 13735 of 2012)

    Bahujan Samaj Party

    ….
    Appellant(s)

    Versus

    Ex CJI Sathasivam Ex Election
    Commission of India Sampath

    ….
    Respondent(s) Narendra Modi, Mohan Bagawath, Amit Shah, Venkaiah naidu,

    WITH

    WRIT
    PETITION (C) NO. 406 OF 2012

    J U D G M
    E N T

    P.
    Sathasivam, CJI for Ballot Paprers until entire EVMs/VVPAT are replaced

    1)

    Leave
    granted.

    Civil
    Appeal @ SLP (C) No. 13735 of 2012

    2)

    This
    appeal is directed against the judgment and order

    dated
    17.01.2012 passed by the Division Bench of the High

    Court of
    Delhi at New Delhi in W.P.(C) No. 11879 of 2009

    whereby
    the High Court disposed of the petition by


    disallowing
    the prayer made by the appellant herein for

    issuance
    of a writ of


    mandamus


    directing
    the Election


    Commission
    of India (ECI)-Respondent herein to incorporate


    a system
    of Paper Ballots until entire  “paper trail/paper receipt” in the Electronic


    Voting
    Machines (EVMs) as a convincing proof that the EVM


    has
    rightly registered the vote cast by a voter in favour of a


    particular
    candidate.




    Being
    aggrieved of the above, the present appeal has


    been
    filed by way of special leave.


    Writ
    Petition (Civil) No. 406 of 2012


    4)


    One
    Jgatheesan Chandrasekharan, R Muniappa, Gopinath, Dr Ashok Siddharth, Rajendra Satyanarayan Gilda has filed this Writ


    Petition,
    under Article 32 of the Constitution of India, praying


    for
    issuance of a writ of


    mandamus/


    direction(s)
    directing the


    Union of
    India
    Narendra Modi, Mohan Bagawath, Amit Shah, Venkaiah naidu,

    WITH

    , the Chief Election Commissioner and the


    Technical
    Experts Committee-Respondent Nos. 1-3 herein


    respectively
    to effect the necessary modifications in the


    EVMs so
    as to allow the voters to verify their respective votes


    and to
    attach the printers to the EVMs with a facility to print


    the
    running record of the votes for the purpose of verification

     


    by the
    voters in the process of voting. He also prayed for a


    Page 


    3


    direction
    to frame guidelines and to effect necessary


    amendments
    in the Conduct of Election Rules, 1961.


    5)


    In view
    of the pendency of the appeal filed by Dr.


    Subramanian
    Swamy, this Court issued notice in the writ


    petition
    and tagged with the said appeal.


    6)


    Heard Dr.
    Subramanian Swamy, appellant-in-person in


    the
    appeal, Dr. R.R. Deshpande, learned counsel for the writ


    petitioner,
    Mr. Ashok Desai and Ms. Meenakshi Arora, learned


    senior
    counsel for the ECI.


    Contentions:


    7)


    Dr.
    Subramanian Swamy, the appellant herein


    contended
    before this Court that the present system of


    EVMs, as
    utilized in the last few general elections in India,


    does not
    meet all the requirements of the international


    standards
    and though the ECI maintains that the EVMs


    cannot be
    tampered with, but the fact is that EVMs, like all


    electronic
    equipments, are open to hacking.


    8)


    The
    appellant has further highlighted that the instant


    matter
    arises out of the refusal of the ECI to incorporate a


    certain
    obvious safeguard in the EVMs called “paper


    backup”,
    “paper receipt” or “paper trail”, presently in use


    and
    mandated in some countries like USA, which would easily


    and
    cheaply meet the requirement of proof that the EVM has


    rightly
    registered the vote cast by a voter. The appellant has


    further
    highlighted that the “paper trail” system is to


    supplement
    the procedure of voting as in this procedure,


    after
    recording a vote in the EVM, a print out will come out


    which
    will appraise the voter that his vote has been rightly


    registered
    and the same will be deposited in a box which can


    only be used
    by the ECI in case of election dispute.


    9)


    It is the
    categorical stand of the appellant that the


    above
    said system will bring more accuracy in the present


    system
    and if a particular election is challenged on the


    ground
    that some particular identified voter’s voter or the


    votes of
    a group of voters have been suppressed/have not


    been
    correctly assigned by the EVMs, the accepted current


    procedure
    is for a re-run of the same EVMs for a re-count,


    however,
    under the new procedure, a re-count will be of the


    receipts
    in the ballot box containing the printouts the EVMs

     

    5


    had
    issued to the voter thereby ensuring more transparency


    in the
    process.


    10)


    The writ
    petitioner has also raised similar contentions as


    those of
    Dr. Swamy. According to the petitioner, in the


    present
    system of voting through EVMs, there is no such


    facility
    by which a voter can verify and confirm his own


    voting.
    At present, a voter presses a button only but cannot


    ascertain
    the actual voting. He is not sure whether his vote


    is
    recorded or not, if recorded, whether it is recorded in


    favour of
    the person to whom it was intended or not.


    Whether
    it is valid or invalid and whether it is counted or not.


    It is
    submitted by the petitioner that unless and until answers


    to these
    questions are personally seen by the voter, it cannot


    be said
    that voting is made by him because “pressing a


    button of
    choice and getting flashed the red-light” is not


    actual
    voting in real sense unless the voter knows well that


    what has happened
    in consequence of pressing a button of


    his
    choice from the EVMs.


    Stand of
    the Election Commission of India

     

    Page 


    6


    11)


    Mr. Ashok
    Desai, learned senior counsel for the ECI


    submitted
    that the apprehension that EVMs could be


    tampered
    with is baseless. It was also informed to this Court


    that the
    ECI has been exploring the possibility of


    incorporating
    a viable Voter Verifiable Paper Audit Trail


    (VVPAT)
    system as a part of the presently used EVMs to


    make the
    election system more transparent. Further, it was


    brought
    to our notice that the ECI conducted field trials for


    VVPAT
    system earlier also but the same had not been


    successful
    and were discontinued. The ECI also filed a


    counter
    affidavit stating that the EVMs provided by the


    Commission
    are of such a high end technology that it cannot


    be
    hacked.


    12)
    Referring to Section 61A of the Representation of the


    People
    Act, 1951, it is submitted that the Statute itself


    provides
    for recording of votes by EVMs and the ECI has been


    given the
    discretion to prescribe recording of votes by such


    EVMs as
    it may deem fit. This discretion has to be exercised


    in a
    manner to preserve the sanctity of the election process


    and
    ensure that the election is conducted in a free and fair


    6




    Heard Dr.
    Subramanian Swamy, appellant-in-person in


    the
    appeal, Dr. R.R. Deshpande, learned counsel for the writ


    petitioner,
    Mr. Ashok Desai and Ms. Meenakshi Arora, learned


    senior
    counsel for the ECI.


    Contentions:


    7)


    Dr.
    Subramanian Swamy, the appellant herein


    contended
    before this Court that the present system of


    EVMs, as
    utilized in the last few general elections in India,


    does not
    meet all the requirements of the international


    standards
    and though the ECI maintains that the EVMs


    cannot be
    tampered with, but the fact is that EVMs, like all


    electronic
    equipments, are open to hacking.


    8)


    The
    appellant has further highlighted that the instant


    matter
    arises out of the refusal of the ECI to incorporate a


    certain
    obvious safeguard in the EVMs called “paper


    backup”,
    “paper receipt” or “paper trail”, presently in use


    and
    mandated in some countries like USA, which would easily


    and
    cheaply meet the requirement of proof that the EVM has


    rightly
    registered the vote cast by a voter. The appellant has


    further
    highlighted that the “paper trail” system is to


    supplement
    the procedure of voting as in this procedure,


    after
    recording a vote in the EVM, a print out will come out


    which
    will appraise the voter that his vote has been rightly


    registered
    and the same will be deposited in a box which can


    only be used
    by the ECI in case of election dispute.


    9)


    It is the
    categorical stand of the appellant that the


    above
    said system will bring more accuracy in the present


    system
    and if a particular election is challenged on the


    ground
    that some particular identified voter’s voter or the


    votes of
    a group of voters have been suppressed/have not


    been
    correctly assigned by the EVMs, the accepted current


    procedure
    is for a re-run of the same EVMs for a re-count,


    however,
    under the new procedure, a re-count will be of the


    receipts
    in the ballot box containing the printouts the EVMs

     

    5


    had
    issued to the voter thereby ensuring more transparency


    in the
    process.


    10)


    The writ
    petitioner has also raised similar contentions as


    those of
    Dr. Swamy. According to the petitioner, in the


    present
    system of voting through EVMs, there is no such


    facility
    by which a voter can verify and confirm his own


    voting.
    At present, a voter presses a button only but cannot


    ascertain
    the actual voting. He is not sure whether his vote


    is
    recorded or not, if recorded, whether it is recorded in


    favour of
    the person to whom it was intended or not.


    Whether
    it is valid or invalid and whether it is counted or not.


    It is
    submitted by the petitioner that unless and until answers


    to these
    questions are personally seen by the voter, it cannot


    be said
    that voting is made by him because “pressing a


    button of
    choice and getting flashed the red-light” is not


    actual
    voting in real sense unless the voter knows well that


    what has happened
    in consequence of pressing a button of


    his
    choice from the EVMs.


    Stand of
    the Election Commission of India

     

    Page 


    6


    11)


    Mr. Ashok
    Desai, learned senior counsel for the ECI


    submitted
    that the apprehension that EVMs could be


    tampered
    with is baseless. It was also informed to this Court


    that the
    ECI has been exploring the possibility of


    incorporating
    a viable Voter Verifiable Paper Audit Trail


    (VVPAT)
    system as a part of the presently used EVMs to


    make the
    election system more transparent. Further, it was


    brought
    to our notice that the ECI conducted field trials for


    VVPAT
    system earlier also but the same had not been


    successful
    and were discontinued. The ECI also filed a


    counter
    affidavit stating that the EVMs provided by the


    Commission
    are of such a high end technology that it cannot


    be
    hacked.


    12)
    Referring to Section 61A of the Representation of the


    People
    Act, 1951, it is submitted that the Statute itself


    provides
    for recording of votes by EVMs and the ECI has been


    given the
    discretion to prescribe recording of votes b

    y such


    EVMs as
    it may deem fit. This discretion has to be exercised


    in a
    manner to preserve the sanctity of the election process


    and
    ensure that the election is conducted in a free and fair


    6


    Page
    7
    manner. The ECI has exercised due diligence to ensure that
    EVMs so used are “tamper proof” and it is also in the process
    of exploring to incorporate VVPAT system which is
    compatible with the present EVMs used by it. It is asserted
    that there is no instance of tampering with EVMs so far by
    anyone.
    13)
    It is further submitted that the EVMs used in India are
    unique and unlike the ones used in the elections in USA and
    other countries, which are personal computer based. EVMs
    deployed by the ECI have been lauded not only in India but
    also abroad. EVM’s Control Unit retains in the memory each
    vote recorded elector-wise. The information stored in the
    memory of the Control Unit can be retrieved by using a
    device called the “decoder” which, when attached to the
    Control Unit of EVM, can print out the statement of voting
    data showing the order in which each voter has voted and to
    whom he has voted.
    14)
    Insofar as the transparency of the election process as
    well as the right of a voter to know whether his vote has
    actually been recorded for the candidate for whom it was
    7


    Page
    8
    cast is concerned, it is submitted that as soon as a vote is
    recorded by a voter by pressing the “candidate’s” button on
    the Ballot Unit, a light glows against the name and symbol of
    the candidate, which the voter can see for himself/ herself.
    This is a visual (electronic) assurance to the voter that the
    candidate for whom he has cast his vote has actually got that
    vote. Thereafter, the light goes off to protect the secrecy of
    voting.
    15)
    It is further submitted that the feasibility of VVPAT
    system was sought to be explored to by various political
    parties and they were explained the technical and
    administrative safeguards. The ECI also constituted a
    Technical Experts Committee to examine the viability of the
    VVPAT system. On 27.05.2011, the Technical Experts
    Committee, after discussion with political parties and civil
    society members and also after seeing the demonstration of
    the prototype VVPAT system developed by M/s. Bharat
    Electronics Ltd. (BEL) and M/s. Electronics Corporation of
    India Ltd. (ECIL), recommended that a field test of the
    prototype VVPAT system should be carried out in a simulated
    8


    Page
    9
    election under different environmental conditions in
    Jaisalmer, Thiruvananthapuram, Delhi, Leh and Cherapunji.
    The ECI also held further meetings with the manufacturers of
    EVMs on various dates to fine tune the system and expedite
    the follow up action required. Several meetings were also
    held with the Expert Committee on VVPAT system.
    16)
    In wider fulfillment of the objectives of the field trial, the
    ECI has requested the National and State parties to extend
    necessary cooperation by getting involved in the trial process
    actively and also witness the trial in order to have a first
    hand experience of the system. The ECI has also requested
    the individuals including the appellant – Dr. Subramanian
    Swamy and the groups, who have been engaged with the ECI
    on the issue of EVM-VVPAT, to witness the trial.
    17) We have carefully perused the relevant materials and
    considered the rival contentions.
    Discussion
    18)
    When the matter was listed before this Court for
    hearing on 27.09.2012, Mr. Ashok Desai had brought to our
    notice that the ECI is contemplating foolproof method in
    9



    Page
    10
    EVMs for which they are taking various steps in consultation
    with the Technical Experts Committee and the views of all
    recognized political parties. Mr. Desai also promised to
    appraise this Court about the deliberations and the ultimate
    decision to be taken by them in this regard. Accordingly, this
    Court granted sufficient time to the ECI to file Status Report
    regarding introduction of VVPAT system in EVMs to be used
    in the elections.
    19)
    Pursuant to the directions of this Court, the ECI filed a
    Status Report on the developments of VVPAT system. In the
    said report, the ECI, citing various technicalities, prayed for
    further time to make the system more robust for the field
    conditions.
    20)
    On 15.12.2012, M/s BEL, Bangalore filed a report
    showing the status of development of VVPAT system which
    contains changes that have been carried out in VVPAT from
    September to December, 2012 and also furnished
    chronological changes made in VVPAT system after the field
    trial of the VVPAT system held in July and August, 2012.
    10


    Page
    11
    21)
    Pursuant to the directions of this Court, the Secretary,
    ECI, filed an affidavit highlighting the following steps/
    information:
    (i)
    That vide its Affidavit dated 14.01.2013, the
    Commission had filed the status report regarding
    introduction of the VVPAT system in the Electronic
    Voting Machines (EVMs).
    (ii)
    That subsequently, in the Technical Expert
    Committee meeting held on 04.02.2013, the
    Committee approved the design of the VVPAT and
    decided that software fine tuning will be done and
    completed by the end of February, 2013, and
    modified design specifications will be submitted to
    the Technical Expert Committee for approval.
    The Committee also recommended that the
    Commission may for using the VVPAT and that the
    VVPAT should be tried in a bye-election.
    (iii)
    That in the Technical Expert Committee
    meeting held on 19.02.2013, the Committee
    finalized the VVPAT design.
    The manufacturers, namely, M/s. Bharat Electronics
    Limited and M/s. Electronics Corporation of India
    Limited have quoted Rs. 16,200/- (excluding duties,
    taxes and transport charges) per VVPAT system.
    The Commission has decided to purchase sufficient
    units of VVPAT for trials in a Bye-election, at an
    approximate cost of Rs.72,90,000/- (Rupees seventy
    two lakh ninety thousand) approximately.
    (iv)
    It is submitted that the Commission will
    require approximately 13 lakh VVPAT units to be
    manufactures for 13 lakh EVMs presently available
    and roughly about Rs. 1690 crores (One Thousand
    Six Hundred Ninety Crores)(i.e. 13 lakh units x
    Rs.13,000 per unit) are required for the purpose of
    implementation of the VVPAT system taking into
    account the possible reduction in the cost per unit
    when produced in bulk.
    (v)
    It is further submitted that in order to
    implement the new system the Conduct of Election
    Rules, 1961 will require certain amendments.
    In this connection, vide letter No.
    3/1/2013/Vol.II/SDR/86 dated 28.03.2013, the
    11


    Page
    12
    Commission has informed the Legislative
    Department of the Ministry of Law and Justice
    inter
    alia
    the various amendments required to the
    relevant parts of Rules 49A to 49X, 66A, 55C, 56C,
    57C and Form 17C of the Conduct of Elections Rules,
    1961, as well as introduction of Rules 49MA and 56D
    in the said Rules…
    (vi)
    That the Commission has called for a meeting
    of all the recognized National and State Parties on
    10
    th
    May, 2013 for the purpose of demonstration of
    VVPAT unit to them and for discussion with them for
    eliciting their views regarding use of VVPAT system
    in the elections. The petitioner herein and others
    interested in the matter would also be invited at the
    meeting.”
    22)
    It is seen from the records that after various
    deliberations with the experts and persons concerned with
    the technology, the Technical Experts Committee approved
    the final design of VVPAT units in its meeting held on
    19.01.2013. In order to meet the directions of this Court and
    for proper execution of VVPAT system, as noticed above, the
    ECI in its letter dated 28.03.2013, addressed to the Secretary
    to the Government of India, Ministry of Law and Justice stated
    that necessary ground work for amendment to the Conduct
    of Election Rules, 1961 (in relevant parts in Rules 49A to 49X,
    66A, 55C, 56C, 57C and Form 17C) may be made so that the
    amendment to the Rules can be notified immediately which
    12


    Page
    13
    will enable the ECI to use the VVPAT system in bye-elections
    in consultation with the political parties. By placing all those
    materials, the ECI requested the Ministry of Law and Justice
    for drafting and notifying amendment Rules expeditiously.
    23)
    From the materials placed by the ECI, it is noted that
    the purchase order has been placed with M/s BEL and M/s
    ECIL for supplying 150 and 300 VVPAT units respectively at
    Rs. 16,200/- per unit excluding excise duty, sales tax and
    transportation etc. costing Rs. 72,90,000/- (approx.). The ECI
    has also highlighted that if the VVPAT systems are ultimately
    to be used with all the 13 lakh EVMs available, the total cost
    in the purchase of VVPAT units may come to about Rs. 1,690
    crores, taking into account the possible reduction in the cost
    per unit due to bulk production the cost may come to Rs.
    13,000/- per unit approximately.
    24)
    The affidavit dated 21.08.2013, filed on behalf of the
    ECI, shows that the Ministry of Law and Justice, on
    24.07.2013, referred the draft notification to amend the
    Conduct of Election Rules, 1961 to provide for use of VVPAT
    system of elections to the ECI for its views and comments.
    13


    Page
    14
    The ECI suggested certain minor modifications in the draft
    notification and sent the same back to the Ministry of Law
    and Justice on 02.08.2013 with a request to notify the
    amendment Rules at the earliest. Accordingly, the Ministry
    of Law and Justice notified the amendments to the Conduct
    of Election Rules, 1961 in the Gazette of India vide
    notification No. S.O. 2470(E) dated 14.08.2013 to enable use
    of VVPAT with EVMs.
    25)
    The aforesaid affidavit of the ECI also shows that the
    ECI had also convened a meeting of all the recognized
    National and State political parties on 10.05.2013 and
    demonstrated before their representatives the working of
    VVPAT system. Separately, on the same day, the ECI also
    held a meeting with individuals including the appellant
    herein who had been engaged with the ECI over the past
    several years regarding the functioning of EVMs. VVPAT
    system was demonstrated before them as well.
    Representatives of political parties and other individuals
    expressed their satisfaction over the VVPAT system.
    Thereafter, the ECI had decided to use the VVPAT system in
    14



    Page
    15
    the bye-election from 51-Noksen (ST) Assembly Constituency
    in the State of Nagaland. Instructions were issued to hold
    special meetings with the contesting candidates in that
    constituency to brief them about the use of VVPAT system.
    The ECI also organized special training sessions for poll
    officers for the use of VVPAT and steps were taken to
    educate the electors for the same.
    26)
    After various hearings, when the matter was heard on
    4.10.2013, an affidavit dated 01.10.2013 filed on behalf of
    the ECI was placed before this Court. The said affidavit was
    filed to place on record the performance/result of the
    introduction of the VVPAT system in the bye-election from
    51-Noksen (ST) Assembly Constituency of Nagaland for which
    the poll was conducted on 04.09.2013 indicating the future
    course of action to be decided by the ECI on the basis of said
    performance. By this affidavit, it was brought to our notice
    that since VVPAT system was being used for the first time,
    the ECI has decided that intensive training shall be given to
    the polling officers. Members of the Technical Experts
    Committee of the ECI also went to supervise training and the


    Page
    16
    actual use of VVPAT in the bye-election. It is further stated
    that the ECI also wrote letters to all the recognized political
    parties and other persons, including the appellant herein,
    engaged with the ECI on this subject inviting them to witness
    the use of VVPAT. It is also brought to our notice that VVPAT
    was successfully used in all the 21 polling stations of 51-
    Noksen (ST) Assembly Constituency of Nagaland. It was also
    stated that as per the Rules, the paper slips of VVPAT shall
    not be counted normally except in case the Returning Officer
    decides to count them on an application submitted by any of
    the candidates. However, since VVPAT system was being
    used for the first time in any election, the ECI decided on its
    own to count paper slips of VVPAT in respect of all polling
    stations. According to the ECI, no discrepancy was found
    between the electronic and paper count.
    27)
    In the said affidavit, it is finally stated that the ECI has
    decided to increase the use of VVPAT units in a phased
    manner and for this purpose the ECI has already written to
    the Government of India, Ministry of Law and Justice to issue
    administrative and financial sanction for procurement of
    16


    Page
    17
    20,000 units of VVPAT (10,000 each from M/s BEL and M/s
    ECIL) costing about Rs. 38.01 crore.
    28)
    Though initially the ECI was little reluctant in
    introducing “paper trail” by use of VVPAT, taking note of the
    advantage in the system as demonstrated by Dr.
    Subramanian Swamy, we issued several directions to the
    ECI . Pursuant to the same, the ECI contacted several expert
    bodies, technical advisers, etc. They also had various
    meetings with National and State level political parties,
    demonstrations were conducted at various places and finally
    after a thorough examination and full discussion, VVPAT was
    used successfully in all the 21 polling stations of 51-Noksen
    (ST) Assembly Constituency of Nagaland. The information
    furnished by the ECI, through the affidavit dated 01.10.2013,
    clearly shows that VVPAT system is a successful one. We
    have already highlighted that VVPAT is a system of printing
    paper trail when the voter casts his vote, in addition to the
    electronic record of the ballot, for the purpose of verification
    of his choice of candidate and also for manual counting of
    votes in case of dispute.
    17


    Page
    18
    29)
    From the materials placed by both the sides, we are
    satisfied that the “paper trail” is an indispensable
    requirement of free and fair elections. The confidence of the
    voters in the EVMs can be achieved only with the
    introduction of the “paper trail”. EVMs with VVPAT system
    ensure the accuracy of the voting system. With an intent to
    have fullest transparency in the system and to restore the
    confidence of the voters, it is necessary to set up EVMs with
    VVPAT system because vote is nothing but an act of
    expression which has immense importance in democratic
    system.
    30)
    In the light of the above discussion and taking notice of
    the pragmatic and reasonable approach of the ECI and
    considering the fact that in general elections all over India,
    the ECI has to handle one million (ten lakhs) polling booths,
    we permit the ECI to introduce the same in gradual stages or
    geographical-wise in the ensuing general elections. The
    area, State or actual booth(s) are to be decided by the ECI
    and the ECI is free to implement the same in a phased


    Page
    19
    manner. We appreciate the efforts and good gesture made
    by the ECI in introducing the same.
    31)
    For implementation of such a system (VVPAT) in a
    phased manner, the Government of India is directed to
    provide required financial assistance for procurement of units
    of VVPAT.
    32)
    Before parting with the case, we record our appreciation
    for the efforts made by Dr. Subramanian Swamy as well as
    the ECI, in particular Mr. Ashok Desai and Ms. Meenakshi
    Arora, learned senior counsel for the ECI.
    33)
    With the above directions, the appeal and the writ
    petition are disposed of. No separate order is required in the
    applications for intervention. Both sides are permitted to
    approach this Court for further direction(s), if need arises.
    ………………………………………….CJI
    (P. SATHASIVAM)
    ………………………………………..J.
    (RANJAN GOGOI)
    19

    20
    NEW DELHI;
    OCTOBER 8, 2013.


    18

    Leave a Reply