The Supreme Court has dismissed a review petition challenging its recent decision to reject a plea for tallying every Voter Verifiable Paper Audit Trail (VVPAT) slip with votes cast through Electronic Voting Machines (EVMs).

A division bench consisting of Justices Sanjiv Khanna and Dipankar Datta concluded that there is no basis for reviewing the judgment issued on April 26.

"We have carefully perused the review petition, as also the grounds in support thereof. In our opinion, no case for review of the judgment dated 26.04.2024 is made out. The review petition is, accordingly, dismissed," the Court said.

In his review plea, petitioner Arun Kumar Agarwal argued that the April 26 judgment contained mistakes and errors.

"It is not correct to state that the result will be unreasonably delayed [by tallying EVM votes with VVPAT slips], or the manpower required will be the double of that already deployed ... Existing CCTV surveillance of counting halls would ensure that manipulation and mischief does not occur in VVPAT slip counting," the review petition said.

On April 26, the Supreme Court dismissed the plea for tallying all VVPAT slips with EVM votes and rejected the suggestion to revert to a paper ballot-based voting system. The Court emphasized the importance of nurturing a culture of trust and collaboration to strengthen democracy. However, it directed the Election Commission of India (ECI) and other authorities to take specific steps to enhance confidence in EVMs. These measures include the following:

1. Upon completion of the symbol loading process, the symbol loading units (SLUs) shall be sealed and stored in strong rooms for 45 days.
   
2. All candidates shall have the option to be present during the verification process. The district election officer shall certify the authenticity of the burnt memory.

3. The burnt memory in the micro-controller unit is to be checked by a team of engineers. 

In his review plea against the verdict, Agarwal argued that these measures are not adequate.

"The entire discussion on the SLU ignores the fact that SLU is vulnerable and needs to be audited. This Hon’ble Court completely overlooked the possibility that the data in the SLU can have extra bytes other than just the necessary images," the review plea stated.

The review petitioner also contended that the April 26 judgment incorrectly noted that 5 percent of the VVPAT slips are currently tallied with votes cast, whereas, in practice, only 1.97 percent of VVPAT slips are tallied with EVM votes.