Discrepancies in votes polled and counted; ECI being irresponsible: Former CEC

The growing clamour for the election commission of India to explain discrepancies in the votes polled and the votes counted in the 2024 Lok Sabha election is distressing and entirely avoidable, the former CEC told a TV news channel this week. He insisted that there is no possibility of any discrepancy in the data, which is collected in real time. If discrepancies still appeared in the data uploaded by the ECI, it is the duty and the responsibility of the commission to set the doubts at rest.

He was reacting to a question on a report released by ADR (Association for Democratic Reforms) in New Delhi this week. Matching the data uploaded on ECI’s website, the ADR found discrepancies in as many as 538 parliamentary constituencies.

While the ADR released its report on 29 July, a week earlier on 22 July yet another organisation Vote for Democracy (Maharashtra) released a publication and alleged that the voter turnout hike in phase 2 of the seven-phase polling resulted in  “beneficial results for the NDA/BJP: in several states. It also gave the break up and claimed that the BJP had gained 3 seats in West Bengal, 8 in Uttar Pradesh, 6 in Madhya Pradesh , 3 in Chhattisgarh, 1 each in Tripura and Jammu and Kashmir, 12 in Karnataka, 10 in Rajasthan and 4 in Assam during the second phase of polling.

“Such a trend”, it observed, “is not seen in the other 6 phases of polling including in the same states of West Bengal, Uttar Pradesh, Jammu and Kashmir, Karnataka, Rajasthan”. “In this phase 2, the example of Kerala is unique in that the BJP in this phase got one seat, stood 2nd in another seat and 3rd in 14 out of a total of 20 seats in the state”.  Even more sensationally, the report asserted, “close to 5 crore vote hikes has benefitted BJP/NDA to secure at least 76 seats, which it may have lost in the absence of such hike”.

The discrepancies in votes counted were also raised in 2019 by independent journalist Poonam Agarwal. This was followed by a petition in the Supreme Court filed by ADR, a petition that remains pending and is yet to be heard. At the media briefing this week hosted by the ADR, Agarwal recalled that the election commission had reacted to her report by withdrawing the data from the website. However, in September the same year the election commission had uploaded a detailed constituency-wise analysis of results, where the data matched and showed no discrepancy at all, she pointed out. In 2024 also, by September-October, the election commission will come out with a detailed analysis, she said and added that she had no doubt that the data would match oncs again.

Speaking for the ADR, Prof Jagdeep Chhokar emphasised that the ADR was not interested in analysing who won and who lost in which seat. It was interested in ensuring transparency and accountability and expected the election commission to explain the mismatch in its own data.

Former chief election commissioner Quraishi agrees. In thousands of branches of commercial banks in the country, he pointed out, accounts are tallied at the end of each day and a difference of even one Rupee has to be accounted for. In the electoral process too, there cannot be a difference of even one vote and the election commission’s responsibility is to clear the air. It cannot remain silent.

The ECI, however, has filed an affidavit before the Supreme Court claiming that it is not legally bound to share the voter turnout data with anyone except the candidates and their agents. Disclosure of voter turnout data, the affidavit claimed, would create confusion among voters and could be exploited by vested interests in closely contested elections.  

Explaining the polling process, Quraishi scoffs at such excuses. In every polling booth every vote is recorded in real time and a register is maintained. At any point of time, the presiding officer would have to look only at the last row and indicate how many votes had been cast till then. There is no reason for any delay in getting the information, he explains. When the voting hour ends, there could still be 50 or 100 voters in the queue and under the rules polling cannot close till all of them cast their votes. At the same time, no polling booth can close operations till the polling is over, and the polling agents of the candidates are not handed over the form 17 C with no. of polled votes after obtaining the agents’ signatures. The EVMs and VVPATs etc are then sealed ‘thrice’ and a unique number printed in the security press put on them.

This is why the final figure of votes polled used to be available to the ECI the very next morning. There can be no question of any delay in releasing the figure, he says. This year, however, the ECI took 11 days before sharing the data related to the first phase of polling. The former CEC was equally scathing about the Supreme Court and wondered why the apex court could not hear ADR’s petition for the past five years. What can be more important in a democracy than the electoral process, he exclaimed.