The Karnataka High Court delivered a landmark judgment on Tuesday, mandating a comprehensive recount of votes for the Malur Assembly constituency in Kolar district. This order effectively overturned the May 2023 election victory of Congress candidate K.Y. Nanje Gowda. The court’s decision stemmed from the District Election Officer’s (DEO) critical failure to furnish video recordings of the vote counting process, which were vital for examining claims of procedural irregularities.
Furthermore, the court instructed the Election Commission of India (ECI) to formally acknowledge the DEO’s inability to present the required video evidence and to initiate suitable legal action against the officer for this significant lapse.
Justice R. Devdas issued this ruling while partially accepting an election petition submitted by the Bharatiya Janata Party’s (BJP) defeated candidate, K.S. Manjunath Gowda.
The court explicitly ordered both the DEO and the ECI to oversee the vote recount and declare the new results within a strict four-week timeframe. All subsequent electoral procedures must then be carried out in adherence to legal protocols following the fresh declaration.
However, the High Court temporarily suspended its recounting order for 30 days, allowing Mr. Nanje Gowda an opportunity to appeal the decision before the Supreme Court.
Allegations of Irregularities Before EVM Opening
In his petition, Mr. Manjunath Gowda presented several grave allegations concerning illegalities during the counting process. He specifically claimed that the Returning Officer (RO) and their team had secured signatures from his counting agents before the Electronic Voting Machines (EVMs) were even unsealed. This, he argued, constituted a clear breach of Rule 66A of the Conduct of Election Rules, 1961.
Further allegations included the RO’s failure to address the petitioner’s application for a recount, incorrect tabulation of votes, a lack of required signatures from counting agents on numerous Form-17C Part-II documents, and the unauthorized entry of individuals into the counting center.
The High Court emphasized that these allegations could have been readily confirmed had the DEO simply provided the videography of the counting process, which is a mandatory requirement under the Election Commission of India’s (ECI) regulations.
The court highlighted that ECI norms explicitly state: “the videography should indicate the date and time, and the video CDs should be sealed, clearly labelling all the details contained therein after the counting process is over for future reference.” The High Court stressed that these were not mere guidelines but critical mandates for ensuring transparency.
It was further noted by the High Court that ECI guidelines also permit candidates to receive a free CD containing the full videography of the counting process upon specific request, underscoring the clear intent behind such transparency measures.
DEO’s Failure to Produce Evidence
Despite the court issuing summons to the DEO to present the crucial videography of the counting process, the official failed to do so. Instead, an affidavit was submitted, detailing communications with a service provider. The service provider’s response indicated they had delivered the hard disk containing the video recordings and received a completion certificate from the DEO upon data receipt, as noted by the High Court.
Justice Devdas expressed frustration, stating, “The ECI is aware of all these developments; however, all efforts made by this court to secure the video recordings have gone in vain.” He consequently ordered the recounting, drawing parallels with a recent apex court ruling that upheld a recount when a presiding officer’s polling diary went missing, reinforcing the importance of verifiable electoral records.