Just about six days before elections to Municipal Corporations, Municipal Councils and Nagar Panchayats, the Election Commission of India on Wednesday informed the Punjab and Haryana High Court that it could provide the requisite number of EVMs from the neighbouring State of Rajasthan within two to three days.
The assertion came amidst stand by the State Election Commission that election through EVMs would still not be possible as 15 to 18 days were required fort the deployment of the EVMs and the elections were less than a week away.
Punjab Advocate-General Maninderjit Singh Bedi, too, opposed the petition on the grounds of maintainability. Quoting the Apex Court, Bedi contended that the process could not be interfered with after the issuance of election notification.
As a petition challenging the decision to conduct the elections through ballot paper instead of EVMs came up for resumed hearing before the Bench headed by Chief Justice Sheel Nagu, the Election Commission of India through counsel Prateek Gupta placed on record a detailed timeline asserting that the delay in requisition and procurement of machines lay with the Punjab State Election Commission and not the ECI.
The ECI categorically disputed the stand taken on behalf of the State Election Commission and termed the allegation that EVMs were unavailable as “false and factually incorrect”.
According to the ECI, the process ought to have been initiated nearly six months prior to the expiry of the term in April 2026, whereas the first request was made only towards the end of January this year. It further stated that on February 11, approval was granted for allocation of EVMs.
The affidavit added that the request was approved on February 28. Directions were issued for collection of the machines from Machilipatnam facility in Andhra Pradesh, along with necessary logistical arrangements. However, consequential steps were not taken thereafter by the State Election Commission.
The ECI further pointed out that although subsequent communications were exchanged in March and April 2026, including logistical instructions from BEL regarding transportation from Bengaluru to Punjab, the State Election Commission failed to act in time.
The ECI stated that it was prepared to supply the required EVMs from Rajasthan within two or three days, provided the State Election Commission deployed the requisite officers. Appearing for the petitioner, senior advocates Chetan Mittal and Amit Jhanji argued that the conduct of the State Election Commission gave rise to serious concerns over institutional independence. It was contended that there appeared to be an “intentional delay” to justify a shift away from EVM-based polling.
After hearing the matter at length, the Bench did not pass any immediate directions on merits and kept the case for the following day, directing the State Election Commission to file an affidavit setting out its stand along with all correspondence and letters it sought to rely upon.
