EVMs are fine when you win, tampered when you lose: SC dismisses plea for ballot paper voting

The Supreme Court dismissed a PIL seeking a return to ballot paper voting, citing inconsistency in EVM tampering claims and emphasising its impracticality.

The Supreme Court dismissed a public interest litigation (PIL) on Tuesday that sought a return to ballot paper voting in elections, emphasising the inconsistency of claims regarding electronic voting machines (EVMs). A bench comprising Justices Vikram Nath and P.B. Varale remarked, “What happens is, when you win the election, EVMs are not tampered. When you lose the election, EVMs are tampered (with).”

The petitioner, K.A. Paul, sought multiple directions, including reverting to ballot papers, disqualification of candidates found guilty of distributing money or liquor to voters, and a framework to curb electoral malpractice. Representing himself, Paul also argued for a voter education campaign to enhance electoral participation.

K.A. Paul, who claimed to lead an organisation supporting over 3 lakh orphans and 40 lakh widows, faced scrutiny from the Supreme Court over his involvement in electoral matters. The bench asked, “Why are you getting into this political arena? Your area of work is very different.” Paul argued that India should revert to ballot paper voting, as practised in several foreign nations, but the bench countered, “Why don’t you want to be different from the rest of the world?” When Paul cited corruption and the Election Commission’s Rs 9,000 crore seizure in 2024, the bench responded, “If you shift back to the physical ballot, will there be no corruption?” Highlighting inconsistencies in claims, the court remarked that losing politicians often attribute defeats to EVM tampering.

The petitioner also sought strict penalties for vote-buying and greater efforts to educate voters, expressing concern that 32% of educated citizens abstain from voting. “What a tragedy. If democracy is dying like this and we cannot do anything, what will happen in the future?” he said. Despite his arguments, the court dismissed the plea, emphasising that returning to ballot paper voting was neither practical nor a viable solution to the issues raised.