The recent Maharashtra assembly election results, marked by a sweeping victory for the BJP-led NDA government, have sparked heated debates, both in political circles and the judiciary. With a striking 76.9% success rate across the three main NDA parties and the BJP alone achieving an unprecedented 89%, the outcome has raised eyebrows about the integrity of the electoral process.
Opposition voices were swift and sharp. Shiv Sena (UBT) leader Sanjay Raut directly criticized former Chief Justice of India (CJI) D.Y. Chandrachud, attributing the unexpected results to the judiciary’s delayed verdicts on critical electoral cases. Raut stated, “History will not forgive Justice Chandrachud… His name will be written in black letters.” Meanwhile, the Congress, reeling from a meager 16% success rate, accused the ruling alliance of a “targeted conspiracy” to undermine fair elections.
Critics argue that such allegations stem from systemic issues surrounding the integrity of electronic voting machines (EVMs) and voter-verifiable paper audit trails (VVPATs). These concerns have persisted despite the Supreme Court’s repeated endorsements of the EVM-VVPAT system.
The Legacy of CJI Chandrachud and EVM Controversies
During his tenure as CJI, D.Y. Chandrachud was accused of avoiding cases with high political stakes, particularly those questioning election integrity. Critics argue his role as “master of the roster”—which grants the CJI discretionary power to assign cases—enabled him to sideline petitions addressing the verifiability of EVMs. This discretion, they claim, substantially influenced judicial outcomes.
In March 2023, the Association for Democratic Reforms (ADR) filed a public interest litigation (PIL) seeking full VVPAT verification for EVMs. The petition aimed to ensure that each voter could confirm their vote was cast, recorded, and counted accurately. Despite comprehensive expert reports supporting the petition, it faced multiple adjournments and was ultimately dismissed shortly before the 2024 parliamentary elections.
Key Findings and Expert Opinions
A report by the Citizens’ Commission on Elections (CCE), led by a former Supreme Court judge, highlighted significant flaws in the current EVM-VVPAT system. It concluded that the system lacks end-to-end verifiability, making it unfit for democratic elections. Among the experts supporting the report were renowned academics like Ronald Rivest (MIT) and Alex Halderman (University of Michigan), who emphasized the need for stringent audits of electronic vote counts and manual verification of VVPAT slips.
Despite these findings, the Supreme Court’s judgment dismissed the concerns, stating, “EVMs are simple, secure, and user-friendly… The incorporation of VVPAT fortifies vote verifiability.” However, critics argue the court failed to address the core issue: the absence of voter oversight in the recording and counting processes.
Judicial Precedents and Missed Opportunities
The ADR’s 2023 petition was a continuation of earlier pleas, including one led by former Andhra Pradesh Chief Minister Chandrababu Naidu in 2019. Back then, the Supreme Court had directed a limited 2% manual cross-verification of VVPAT slips with EVM results. Petitioners had sought a higher verification threshold, citing statistical evidence, but the court deemed it unnecessary.
By 2023, the ADR had hoped for a more robust review, especially with ample time before the 2024 elections. However, procedural delays and judicial reluctance thwarted any substantial review. Justice Chandrachud’s critics argue that his court prioritized expediency over electoral transparency, leaving unresolved doubts about EVM reliability.
Implications for Indian Democracy
The Supreme Court’s endorsement of EVMs as the backbone of India’s electoral system contrasts sharply with global skepticism surrounding electronic voting. Critics highlight the need for systems that are not only efficient but also transparent and verifiable by the electorate.
The dismissal of the ADR petition and the subsequent endorsement of EVMs in the 2024 elections have fueled allegations of compromised democratic processes. A report by Voice For Democracy flagged a suspicious increase in votes during the elections, amplifying calls for reform.
In a democracy as vast and diverse as India’s, the integrity of the electoral process is paramount. The debates surrounding EVMs and VVPATs underscore the need for greater accountability and judicial vigilance to uphold public trust in the democratic system.