'Very Unfortunate, SC Resorted To Hyper Technicality On EC disclosure of form 17(C)': Prashant Bhushan
While hearing an application seeking to reveal the voter turnout data under Form 17C, the Supreme Court on Friday refused to direct the Election Commission (EC) to reveal the voter turnout date under Form 17C. The application demands the disclosure of the date, including votes polled and/or rejected, within 48 hours of the end of polling at each booth. The plea also sought to upload the date of each phase on the EC”s website.
Commenting on the Court”s ruling, lawyer Prashant Bhushan said that it was “very unfortunate that the SC resorted to the hyper technicality on the EC disclosure of form 17(C) voter turnout figures by saying that your interim prayers are also in your main prayers.”
The Court while refusing to direct the EC on the application argued that such an order would overburden the Election Commission during polls noting the change of the process midway. The Court also pointed out that five of seven voting phases had been completed and that the results were due in less than two weeks. The result was scheduled to be announced on June 4.
In a post on X (formerly Twitter), Prashant Bhushan further said that the disclosure of EVM-wise voting figures is essential to allay public fears about vote manipulation. “A matter of immense public interest,” he wrote.
The application was filed by the NGO Association for Democratic Reforms (ADR), and Common Cause. The petition argued that it seeks the disclosure of the data to enhance the voter”s confidence in the democratic process. It also cited the discrepancies found on the final date released by the EC in comparison to the initial data. It also questioned the delay in releasing the date by the poll body.
However, while giving the verdict, the bench, stated, “We are simpliciter (directly) adjourning… (and) giving one observation as to why relief cannot be granted at this stage,” and added that this did not constitute a dismissal of the pleas.
“Prima facie we are not inclined to grant relief at this stage, in view of similarity of prayers… granting interim relief would mount to final relief. Therefore, we list these applications after the vacation…What is the nexus between 2019 and 2024 applications? Why didn”t you file a separate writ petition?” the court asked ADR.
However, the apex court further said that the application would be heard after the election “In-between an election, hands off! We cannot interrupt (the electoral process)… we are also responsible citizens,” Justice Datta said.
