The Supreme Court on Monday refused to entertain a plea challenging the decision of the Punjab and Haryana High Court declining to direct the Punjab State Election Commission to conduct the upcoming local body elections in Punjab through Electronic Voting Machines (EVMs).

The local body elections in the State are scheduled for May 26, while counting of votes will take place on May 29.

A Bench comprising Chief Justice of India Surya Kant, Justice Joymalya Bagchi and Justice Vipul Pancholi observed that an “unwise choice” by the authorities would not justify judicial intervention to halt an election process.

“If the State Election Commission did not have the power to switch to ballot papers, then we would have intervened,” Justice Bagchi remarked during the hearing.

The Bench noted that the applicable rules permit the use of ballot papers for such elections.

Referring to the Supreme Court’s earlier judgment in the ADR case, the Bench observed that while the Court had described a return to ballot papers as a “regressive step”, changing the mode of voting once the election process was already underway would not be appropriate. The Court, however, indicated that observations could be made for future elections.

When counsel for the petitioner expressed apprehensions about possible booth capturing during the polls, CJI Surya Kant responded that such a situation would amount to a law and order failure.

“If that happens, then it is a failure of law and order. That cannot happen,” he said.

On the petitioner’s request for the appointment of a senior IPS officer as poll observer, Justice Bagchi declined the suggestion, stating that the Court could not presume unfairness in the electoral process.

“Appointment of an observer is a very serious interdiction and we will not do it,” he said.

The Punjab and Haryana High Court had earlier, on May 22, refused to interfere with the State Election Commission’s decision to conduct the elections through ballot papers instead of EVMs.

The High Court had noted that even after the introduction of EVMs, the Punjab Municipal Election Rules continued to retain provisions relating to ballot papers and ballot boxes.

Explaining the rationale, the High Court observed that the rule-making authority had consciously preserved the option of ballot voting in view of prevailing social realities, including illiteracy, poverty and lack of awareness among sections of society. It further noted that situations could arise where either the Election Commission of India or the State Election Commission may need to revert to the traditional voting method.

Following the High Court’s decision, the petitioner approached the apex court, which ultimately dismissed the appeal on Monday.

Senior Advocate Nachiketa Joshi appeared for the petitioner before the Supreme Court.