Disposed

Praful Vithal Loke v. Election Commission of India and Ors.

Bombay HC26 Sept 2014PIL/81/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This PIL petitioners requested directions to the Election Commission to conduct future elections using Electronic Voting Machines only after specific security tests. The court directed the Commission to examine the petitioner's representations and YouTube videos regarding EVM concerns.

What did the court decide?

Direction to the Election Commission to examine grievances regarding EVMs submitted to the President and available on YouTube within one week.

Praful Vithal Loke Vs Election Commission of India and… — Motor Accident Claims | Bombay HC (2014)

pil-81.14

pmw

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶5

PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION NO.81 OF 2014

Praful Vithal Loke

… Petitioner

Vs.

Election Commission of India and Ors. … Respondents

¶10

Mr. Praful Vithal Loke, Petitioner in person.

¶11

Mr. Pradeep Rajagopal a/w Debashree Mandpe i/by Rekha Rajagopal, for the Respondent No.1.

¶12

CORAM : A.S. OKA & G.S. KULKARNI, JJ.

¶13

DATE : 26^th SEPTEMBER, 2014

¶14

P.C.

¶15

. Heard the Petitioner appearing in person and the learned

¶16

counsel appearing for the first Respondent. The only substantive relief sought in this Petition is in paragraph 10 which reads thus :-

¶17

“10. For fair and free election give direction to the Election Commission of India to Conduct all future elections to the House of People and Assemblies of States by using Electronic Voting Machine for recording and counting of votes only after taking tests for all possible “key presses sequence” on Ballot Unit (BU) in the presence of the representatives of the political parties and social activities. Otherwise not to use Electronic Voting Machine for recording and counting of votes.”

¶18

1 of 3

¶19

2 pil-81.14

¶20

Our attention is invited to the representation dated 11th December, 2013 addressed by the Petitioner to the Hon'ble President of India making grievances regarding use of Electronic Voting Machines. We find that the Secretariat of the Hon'ble President of India has forwarded the said letter to the Chief Election Commissioner of the Election Commission of India on 19th December, 2013.

¶21

Moreover, it is pointed out by the Petitioner and is confirmed by the learned counsel for the first Respondent Election Commission of India that the demonstration which the Petitioner wants to show to the Court and to the Respondents is available on You Tube.

¶22

The Petitioner is seeking a relief in the nature of a Writ of Mandamus. The Petitioner should have approached the Election Commission of India with his grievances. Nevertheless, the application made by him to the Hon'ble President of India has been forwarded to the Election Commission of India.

¶23

The Election Commission of India will have to look into the grievances made by the Petitioner in the said representation addressed by the Petitioner to the Hon'ble President of India. The Election Commission will have to consider what is available on You Tube which

¶24

2 of 3

¶25

3 pil-81.14

¶26

is referred to above. It will be open for the Petitioner to make a supplementary representation to the Election Commission of India within a period of one week from today. The Election Commission of India shall look into the grievances made by the Petitioner and will take appropriate decision. With the above directions, the Petition is disposed of.

¶27

(G.S. KULKARNI, J ) (A.S.OKA, J )

¶28

3 of 3

Praful Vithal Loke v. Election Commission of India and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Praful Vithal Loke v. Election Commission of India and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sanjay Kumar Lalit Vs the Union of India and 2 Others

Meera Sanyal and Anr. Vs Union of India and 3 Ors.

Shri. Dilip D. Amane and Ors. Vs the State of Maharashtra, through Secretary, Dept of Co-Operation Marketing and Textile and Ors.

Shri. Dilip D. Amane and Ors. Vs the State of Maharashtra, through Secretary, Dept of Co-Operation Marketing and Textile and Ors.

Sanjay Vitthalrao Jadhav Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

Milind Arvind Pandey Vs the State of Mah and Ors.

Irgonda Melappa Biradar Vs the Union of India through the Ministry of Law and Justice and Ors.

Irgonda Melappa Biradar Vs the Union of India through the Ministry of Law and Justice and Ors.

Ketan Tirodkar Vs Registrar General

Sou. Alka Vijayrao More Vs the State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Karanja Macchimar Vividh Karyakari Sahakari Society Ltd. Vs Union of India, through Ministry of Agriculture Dept of Animal Husbandry, Daiyrying and Anr.

Bahujan Mukti Party, Sangli District Unit, through General Secretary, Maharashtra State Vs Union of India, through Election Commission of India and Ors.

Mr. Yakub Kasim Kamble and Ors. Vs the Chief Executive Officer, Maharashtra State Board of Wakfs and Ors.

Oil States Industries (India) Private Limited and Anr. Vs City and Industrial Development Corporation of Maharashtra Limited and Ors.