The Division Bench of the Delhi High Court dismissed an appeal challenging the use of Electronic Voting Machines (EVMs) in elections across constituencies. The petitioner had raised concerns regarding the use of EVMs, arguing that Section 61-A of the relevant law requires the respondent (Election Commission of India) to provide specific justifications for the use of EVMs in each constituency individually.

The bench, led by Acting Chief Justice Vibhu Bakhru and comprising Justice Tushar Rao Gedela, dismissed the appeal, stating, "We find no merit in the present appeal, and the same is dismissed."

The court noted that the appellant had filed the petition requesting the Election Commission of India (ECI) to comply with the provisions of Section 61A of the Representation of the People Act (RP Act) before proceeding with any elections using EVMs, particularly in relation to the future preparation of electoral rolls.

The bench stated that the appellant argued that the ECI should assess each constituency individually and determine, based on local circumstances, whether EVMs should be used. The petitioner further sought a directive for the ECI to demonstrate how it complies with the mandatory requirement of specifying constituency-wise circumstances for using EVMs.

However, the bench observed that a plain reading of the provision indicates that it permits the ECI, under non-obstante clauses, to adopt the use of EVMs in the manner prescribed. The ECI had already issued directions and placed them on record, specifying the constituencies where EVMs would be used.

While the appellant contended that the ECI must specify each constituency separately, the bench found that the language of the provision does not support this view and, therefore, rejected the appeal.

Earlier, in July 2024, a bench led by Justice Purushaindra Kumar Kaurav had dismissed the plea, observing that the relief sought in the petition essentially sought to revisit a controversy that had already been settled through a series of judicial pronouncements, as discussed in previous rulings. The bench further noted that the petitioner had failed to present any substantial grounds that would justify the Court's further intervention in the matter.

The petitioner Ramesh Chander through plea has sought directions for the respondent to adhere to the provisions of Section 61-A of the Representation of the People Act, 1951 (the 'Act') before proceeding with any elections using Electronic Voting Machines (EVMs).

The petitioner stated that he is primarily aggrieved by the use of EVMs in elections across constituencies, claiming that no reasons have been provided for their usage. The petitioner argued that Section 61-A requires the respondent to detail the circumstances for each constituency individually where EVMs are proposed to be used.