It is a well-established law that a man can’t be tried for a crime twice, so why does the Electronic Voting Machine find itself in the line of questioning?
In March 2023, the Association for Democratic Reforms submitted a petition before the Supreme Court of India, advocating for the verification of electronic voting machines (EVMs) using voter-verifiable paper audit trails (VVPATs) to uphold the integrity of elections. The petitioners proposed the incorporation of barcodes on VVPAT slips to expedite this verification process.
The History of Legal Challenges
But this is not the first time the EVM finds itself in the line of questioning. Legal challenges against EVMs have a long history, with cases spanning several years and various states. The earliest recorded case dates back to 2001 in the Madras High Court, where efforts were made to prohibit the Election Commission from using EVMs in the Tamil Nadu Assembly election of that year.
Subsequent cases emerged in different states and years: 2009 (Rajasthan), 2010 (Madras), 2012 (Gujarat), 2014 (Madras and Madhya Pradesh), 2017 (Bombay and Uttarkashi), 2018 (Bombay and two cases in Madhya Pradesh), 2019 (Delhi and Gujarat), 2020 (Delhi), and 2021 (Delhi). These cases reflect ongoing concerns and legal disputes surrounding the use of EVMs in elections across India.
The very recent and well-known case came in the year 2019, when the president of the Telugu Desam Party (TDP), N. Chandrababu Naidu, filed a petition with the Supreme Court. In February of the same year, then-Chief Minister of Andhra Pradesh, Mr. Chandrababu Naidu, approached the Supreme Court, seeking to compel the Election Commission (EC) to count at least VVPAT slips in at least 50% of the EVM machines.
Upon thorough consideration, the Supreme Court determined that expanding the scope of VVPAT verification from 1 to 5 EVMs per Assembly Constituency or Assembly Segment in a Parliamentary Constituency would not unduly strain the Election Commission in terms of staffing or result announcement timelines.
So, if the court had concluded the EVM and VVPAT debate earlier, why have the petitioners approached the Supreme Court in this matter again?
Res Judicata
To delve into this further, let us first understand the principle of “res judicata.” Res judicata refers to a legal principle indicating that a case that has been conclusively decided upon its merits by a court with appropriate jurisdiction cannot be re-litigated between the same parties.
But the catch in this principle is that Res judicata applies to final judgments on the merits of a case, meaning that once a court has made a final decision on an issue, it cannot be re-litigated between the same parties. However, if new evidence or new legal arguments arise that were not available or considered in the previous case, it may be possible to challenge the issue again.
Since in this case, the petitioners rely on a mock poll, which gives an extra vote to the BJP, and other new evidence, such as a flash memory chip, which is in the EVMs and VVPAT machines, which, according to the petitioners, can be compromised, this matter has risen again. The court heard contentions from both parties, and on Thursday, April 18, 2024, the apex court reserved its judgment.
