The Supreme Court of India, in a recent judgment, underscored the critical importance of preserving all documents related to elections, emphasizing that every such document plays a vital role in ensuring the integrity and transparency of the electoral process. The Court stressed that all possible efforts should be made to safeguard these records to uphold democratic principles.
This observation was made in the context of a legal dispute surrounding the election of a Gram Pradhan in a village in Uttar Pradesh, which took place in 2021. The case arose due to concerns raised about the accuracy of the final vote count. During the proceedings, it was revealed that crucial records maintained by the Presiding Officers were missing, further complicating the matter. Given the absence of these essential documents, the Court expressed concern that the reliability of the declared election results was compromised and fell within the realm of questionability.
The Court’s observation highlights the indispensable role of proper documentation in electoral processes and reinforces the necessity for authorities to maintain and preserve such records meticulously to ensure fairness, accountability, and public trust in democratic institutions.
The Court noted that despite extensive efforts, the Presiding Officer's diary from the polling booths — a crucial document that records the casting of votes — could not be located.
While ordering a recount, a bench of Justice Sanjay Karol and Justice NK Singh observed:
"The candidates in the election wanting to keep an eye on voting during the day and inspect records of the same is something which cannot be denied to them. If the Presiding Officers' records are missing and cannot be verified, it can be found that the final conclusion is within the realm of questionability. Each and every document pertaining to an election is important and all efforts should be made to preserve the same."
The Court further emphasized that in an election, every vote holds intrinsic value, regardless of its impact on the final outcome, and therefore, its sanctity must be upheld. The bench overturned the Allahabad High Court's decision, which had nullified the Sub Divisional Magistrate's order for a recount.
The judgment authored by Justice Karol started with the famous quote of Winston Churchill : “At the bottom of all the tributes paid to democracy is the little man, walking into the little booth, with a little pencil, making a little cross on a little bit of paper—no amount of rhetoric or voluminous discussion can possibly diminish the overwhelming importance of that point.”
In the preface of the judgment, Justice Karol remarked that elections uphold equality for all citizens, emphasizing that every individual's vote holds significance.
"Each and every citizen, when it comes to choosing representatives in the parliamentary system, is indeed equal, when in other scenarios they may not be so, for a variety of reasons - class and caste divisions that are still deeply entrenched, gender inequality, lack of awareness and opportunities for disabled persons, etc."
In this case, the alleged discrepancy pertained to the total number of votes counted. While the appellant was initially informed that 1,193 votes were cast, the official declaration reported 1,213 votes, reflecting a difference of 19 votes. Despite this variance, the respondent secured victory with a margin of 37 votes, meaning that even if the excess 19 votes were deducted, the outcome would remain unchanged. However, the Court clarified that its concern was not with the identity of the winner, but rather with the integrity of the electoral process.
"However, this Court's concern lies away from who is in power, and instead is in how one got to power. This process has to be in accordance with constitutional principles and established norms - if not, then such a person has to be deprived of the power, and the decision-making by the people must begin once more."
The Court further observed:
"When the officer was present there and he informed the candidate, appellant herein, of the number of votes cast, why should there be any difference? We have already observed that each vote has its own value irrespective of its effect in the final outcome of the election. Its sanctity has to be protected."
Given that three out of the four candidates have challenged the authenticity of the election and its conduct, coupled with the unexplained absence of crucial election-related documents, the Court concluded that a recount would be justified under the present circumstances.
info@adhwaitha.com
