The SC refused to preside over the review of an order passed by it on April 8. The objection raised which stated that VVPAT physical verification from 1 to 5 EVMs in each assembly segment is of a parliamentary constituency.
Senior advocate Abhishek Manu Singhvi on behalf of the petition contended that they prayed for 50% manual verification of the paper trail, which was agreed upon, however, the order was only passed to the extent of 2%, even 25% or 33% would have satisfied the petitioner.
Moreover, it was contended by the Senior Advocate Kapil Sibal that the manipulated facts were presented before the bench by the respondent. However, for the smooth functioning of the democracy and to enhance the confidence or faith of the public in the electoral process of the nation the verification is at utmost importance.
Wherefore, in the light of the argument stated by the Advocates, the bench headed by CJI Rajan Gogoi was not inclined to change the earlier order. Moreover, the reference of the decision given in the case of Dr. Subramanian Swamy v.ECI (2013) 10 SCC, which held that VVPAT is an indispensable requirement for conducting free and fair elections.