Congress leader Abhishek Manu Singhvi raised concerns on Thursday regarding the Election Commission of India’s (ECI) response to the party’s request for the disclosure of Form 17C, which contains the number of votes cast in a polling station.
Singhvi stated that despite their complaint, the Election Commission did not mention the names of the prime minister and the home minister in any of their documents. He further highlighted that the Commission did not take any action, impose sanctions, or make any allegations. Instead, they simply wrote to the presidents of both parties, urging their star campaigners to adhere to the model code of conduct (MCC).
Singhvi criticized the Election Commission’s explanation that data could be tampered with or photos could be morphed, leading to the inability to upload the data. He argued that this response was merely a way to avoid the issue. He also pointed out that anyone could obtain this data by paying money to the Election Commission, which he deemed unfortunate and indicative of the Commission’s biased inclination.
The Election Commission of India (ECI) stated to the Supreme Court on May 22 that there is no legal provision to request the publication of final authenticated data on voter turnout in all polling stations.
The ECI, in an affidavit presented to the highest court, mentioned that releasing voter turnout information based on Form 17C (votes cast in each polling station) could cause confusion among voters, as it would include counts from postal ballots as well.
Form 17 C Part I, which is provided to polling agents (representing political parties) by the presiding officer, contains details such as the number of eligible voters assigned to the booth, the number of electors in the voter register, the number of voters who chose not to vote, and the number of voters who were not allowed to vote. The presiding officer is required to specify the number of votes recorded as per the Electronic Voting Machines (EVMs). Polling agents are obligated to provide the officer with a receipt as per Section 49S of the Conduct of Election Rules (CoER), 1961.
Singhvi expressed concerns regarding this matter, stating, “The request for the disclosure of Form 17 C data to the Supreme Court is quite straightforward. It simply asks for information about the specific machines, their serial numbers, and the corresponding polling stations. Additionally, it seeks details about the number of votes cast on each machine. It is imperative for the Election Commission to make all this information available on its official website.”
Singhvi further emphasized that neither he nor the Congress party desires to witness any deterioration in the reputation of the Election Commission. This institution has thrived and gained prominence over the years, and it should not be subjected to unnecessary criticism or scrutiny.