SC seeks EC response on increased voter count per polling station
New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Monday directed the Election Commission of India (ECI) to clarify its decision to increase the maximum number of voters at polling stations from 1,200 to 1,500. The court highlighted that no voter should be excluded due to procedural changes.
A bench comprising Chief Justice Sanjiv Khanna and Justice Sanjay Kumar sought the poll panel’s rationale, stating, “We are concerned. No voter should be excluded.” The bench instructed senior advocate Maninder Singh, representing the ECI, to file a detailed affidavit within three weeks.
Maninder Singh assured the bench that the ECI would explain its position, stating, “Polling has been happening this way since 2019, and political parties are consulted in each constituency before such decisions are implemented.” He also highlighted that polling stations often have multiple booths to accommodate voters and that individuals are allowed to vote even beyond the prescribed hours.
The bench, setting January 27, 2025, as the next hearing date, directed the ECI to share its affidavit with the petitioner beforehand.
The public interest litigation (PIL), filed by Indu Prakash Singh, challenges the ECI’s August communications that raised the voter cap per polling station. Senior advocate Abhishek Singhvi, representing the petitioner, argued that the increase could disproportionately impact underprivileged voters. He warned of longer queues and waiting times, which might discourage people from voting.
“This decision will lead to voter exclusion, particularly among marginalized groups, as extended waiting times at polling stations may dissuade them from exercising their franchise,” Singhvi contended.
He further argued that during elections, a single EVM could process around 490 to 660 votes per day, depending on the time taken per voter. With turnout averaging 65.7 per cent, polling stations designed for 1,000 electors typically handle 650 voters. Singhvi warned that an 85-90 per cent turnout could lead to overcrowding and voter drop-off.
The court, however, noted that the ECI’s intention was to enhance participation by optimizing EVM usage. It observed that electronic voting machines significantly reduced the time required compared to traditional ballot papers, and additional EVMs could further streamline the process.
The petitioner cautioned that the increased voter limit would impact upcoming assembly elections in Bihar and Delhi, following its implementation in Maharashtra and Jharkhand. Singhvi argued that neither voter drop-offs due to long queues nor extended wait times aligns with democratic principles.
