A Bench of Chief Justice of India (CJI) Sanjiv Khanna and Justice PV Sanjay Kumar did not issue a formal notice to the Election Commission of India (ECI) but instead directed the ECI to file a brief affidavit.
NEW DELHI: On Monday (2nd Dec), the Supreme Court instructed the Election Commission of India (ECI) to submit a brief response clarifying its decision to raise the number of voters per polling booth to 1,500 or more.
A Bench of Chief Justice of India (CJI) Sanjiv Khanna and Justice PV Sanjay Kumar did not issue a formal notice to the Election Commission of India (ECI) but instead directed the ECI to file a brief affidavit.
Senior Advocate Maninder Singh, representing the ECI, stated that the number of voters per polling booth had been raised to 1,500 in 2019, and no complaints had been raised until now.
“This 1,500 figure has been in place since 2019, and there have been no issues. If everyone arrives at 3 pm, there’s little that can be done,” he said.
He requested the Court not to issue a formal notice, adding, “Let no notice be issued. There are numerous allegations about EVMs, and if we start addressing them…” He also emphasized that all political parties had been consulted before the decision was made.
The Court ultimately decided not to issue a formal notice but recorded the ECI’s position and instructed it to file a short affidavit.
“Maninder Singh submits that the stand shall be clarified in a short affidavit, which should be filed within three weeks. The matter will be relisted in the week commencing January 27, 2025,” the Court ordered.
The petition was filed by Indu Prakash Singh, represented by advocate Talha Abdul Rahman, with the assistance of Advocates Rafid Akhter and Sudhanshu Tewari.
The petitioner approached the Court seeking orders to maintain the number of electors per polling booth at 1,200, as was practiced from 1957 to 2016, and to increase the number of polling stations in accordance with Section 25 of the Representation of People Act.
Additionally, the petitioner requested the Court to ensure that, at most, the ratio of 1,000-1,200 electors per polling station is upheld, with considerations for the distinction between urban and rural polling centers, and for a gradual reduction of such numbers in the future.
Senior Advocate Maninder Singh, representing the ECI, defended the decision, stating that all political parties are consulted before any polling station changes are implemented.
Singh explained that polling has been conducted under the current setup since 2019, with political parties being consulted beforehand about the number of voters at each station. He also referenced the ongoing allegations about Electronic Voting Machines (EVMs) that have surfaced over time, suggesting that the controversy should not be linked to the issue of voter numbers at polling stations.
Chief Justice of India (CJI) Sanjiv Khanna raised critical concerns during the hearing. He questioned how the increase in voter numbers could affect the efficiency and accessibility of polling stations. Specifically, he inquired whether the rise in voter numbers would result in multiple polling booths within a single station. Singh confirmed that a polling station does consist of several booths to manage the flow of voters.
However, CJI Khanna expressed concern over ensuring that voters face no inconvenience due to these changes, emphasizing that no voter should be inconvenienced at any cost. He directed Singh to file an affidavit explaining the processes involved in determining the number of voters per polling station and how the situation would be managed to maintain accessibility.
In response, the Supreme Court directed the Election Commission to file a short affidavit within three weeks, clarifying its position on the matter.
The affidavit is expected to outline the rationale behind the increase in voter numbers and the measures in place to ensure smooth polling operations. A copy of the affidavit will be shared with the petitioner’s counsel to facilitate further proceedings.
Previous Hearings
A bench comprising Chief Justice Sanjiv Khanna and Justice Sanjay Kumar observed that the apex court cannot issue broad, omnibus directions to all authorities involved.
However, the bench allowed the petitioner, Rashtrawadi Adarsh Mahasangh, a registered political organization, to approach high courts with specific grievances. The court also permitted the petitioner to file representations with the appropriate authorities for redress.
Petitioner’s Argument
The petitioner, represented by advocates Avadh Bihari Kaushik and Umseh Sharma, pointed to the 255th report of the Law Commission of India, which recommended a unified electoral roll.
The petition also referenced the 2021 amendment to the Representation of the People Act, which enabled linking Aadhaar with voter IDs to reduce duplication.
Despite these measures, the petitioner alleged, the issue persists due to poor implementation. The PIL argued that significant duplication in voter rolls persists across the country, warranting urgent corrective action.
The plea demanded:
- Deletion of duplicate voter entries within 30 days.
- Constitution of a Special Investigation Team (SIT), led by a retired Supreme Court judge, to oversee and ensure the rectification process.
FOLLOW US FOR MORE LEGAL UPDATES ON YOUTUBE
