The Supreme Court declined to issue a directive to the Election Commission of India regarding the disclosure of booth-wise voter turnout data under Form 17C. The court addressed a plea requesting the uploading of Form 17C data and booth-wise voter turnout data on the ECI website.

The NGO Association for Democratic Reforms (ADR) filed the application, which was listed alongside a 2019 writ petition by TMC leader Mahua Moitra. The petition alleged discrepancies in the voter turnout data.

A vacation bench comprising Justices Dipankar Datta and Satish Chandra Sharma stated that the Court must adopt a "hands-off approach" towards the election process. They emphasised that there should be no interruptions in the process.

Justice Datta stated during the hearing that a "hands-off approach" should be maintained between elections. He suggested that the application should be heard along with the main writ petition, emphasising that the process should not be interrupted, and there should be trust in the authority.

On May 22, the Election Commission of India informed the Supreme Court that there is no legal entitlement to demand the publication of final authenticated data on voter turnout in all polling stations.

In an affidavit submitted to the Supreme Court, ECI expressed concerns that disclosing voter turnout data based on Form 17C, which includes postal ballot counts, could lead to confusion among voters.

The Association for Democratic Reforms (ADR) filed an application seeking directions for the ECI to upload clear copies of Form 17C Part-I (Account of Votes Recorded) on its website.

According to the application, the data should be uploaded after each phase of polling in the ongoing 2024 elections, providing constituency and polling station-wise figures of voter turnout in both absolute numbers and percentage forms.

Additionally, the ADR requested the disclosure of Part-II of Form 17C, which contains the candidate-wise result of counting after the compilation of results. The NGO alleged that the ECI has failed in its duty to declare election results through EVMs based on accurate and indisputable data.

During a hearing presided over by a Bench comprising CJI DY Chandrachud and Justices JB Pardiwala and Manoj Misra, the ECI counsel was questioned about the difficulty in posting the voter turnout details on its website within two days of polling.

In its reply affidavit, the ECI argued that ADR has "vested interests" in making false allegations against the regulator to discredit its functioning. The poll body stated that ADR has been asserting a legal entitlement where none exists, particularly amid the ongoing Lok Sabha elections.

Image source: India Today