Supreme Court seeks ECI response on plea against increase of voters per polling booth to 1,500

“Your Lordships have not been told this.. 1,500 is being carried out from 2019. And there’s no problem with franchise. People have not complained anywhere…” Singh said, adding that political parties are consulted before every step.

“You file a short affidavit. Explain that position because we are concerned that no voter should be troubled,” said CJI Sanjiv Khanna. Singh said, “Absolutely, that has to be the main concern of the ECI too…”

At the outset, as the bench asked if ECI had indeed pushed the limit from 1200 to 1500, Singh said 1,500 is within the technological limit of the Electronic Voting Machines (EVMs), and added that it’s all rationalised.

When CJI Khanna asked what happens if the number of voters at the polling stations goes beyond 1500, Singh responded by saying, “The mechanism itself provides that before the election, the pre-poll etcetera starts, and political parties are consulted in every constituency”.

The ECI counsel also sought to link it to the accusations against EVMs. “Your Lordships are aware of the allegation against EVMs. Your Lordships have dealt with it in detail. With your indulgence, the mechanism is getting further developed with the advancement of technology,” he said adding the allegations will keep coming.

Singh said queues start forming when people come to polling booths after 3 pm, and everyone who is there before 5 pm is allowed to vote. He added there are no queues at the booths in the morning.

Justice Khanna asked, “Now when we use the term polling booth, we refer to one EVM or we are saying the polling booth may have q number of EVMs? One polling station might have several polling booths. So, would this apply to a single-booth polling station also?”

Singh said he would clarify the position in the affidavit.

In the PIL, petitioner Indu Prakash Singh, a social activist, claimed ECI’s decision to raise the number of voters could lead to longer queues at polling booths and deter the underprivileged from voting as they may not be able to spare a disproportionate amount of time for casting their ballot.