"Secrecy of the Ballot Cannot Be Tinkered Lightly": Supreme Court Orders Recount in Uttar Pradesh Panchayat Election Over Missing Records and Vote Discrepancies
Kiran Raj
The Supreme Court of India has directed a recount of votes cast in a Uttar Pradesh panchayat election, setting aside the judgment of the Allahabad High Court, which had quashed the Sub-Divisional Magistrate’s order allowing a recount. The court held that discrepancies in vote counts, missing election records, and allegations of procedural irregularities warranted a recount to uphold the integrity of the electoral process.
The bench comprising Justice Sanjay Karol and Justice Nongmeikapam Kotiswar Singh heard the appeal challenging the High Court’s decision that had reversed the Election Tribunal’s order for a recount. The court observed that election-related records, including the presiding officer’s diary, were missing, and multiple candidates had raised concerns about the accuracy of the vote tally.
Also Read: Supreme Court Quashes Defamation Case Against Journalists Over News Reports on Art Auction
The dispute arose from the elections for the position of Gram Pradhan in Gram Panchayat Chaka @ Chakpurandar, Saidabad, Tehsil Handia, District Prayagraj, Uttar Pradesh. Elections were conducted on May 2 and 3, 2021, following a notification issued by the state government.
The appellant, who contested the election, alleged discrepancies in the number of votes recorded at polling booths 43, 44, and 45. He claimed that the presiding officer had informed him that 1,194 votes were cast in these booths, whereas the final election tally in Form 46 indicated 1,213 votes. He contended that 19 votes were unaccounted for, suggesting possible irregularities.
The appellant also alleged that election officers had unlawfully canceled votes cast in his favor and that police personnel forcibly removed him from the polling area. He submitted affidavits from two other candidates supporting his claim that irregularities had occurred.
The appellant first approached the Election Officer, requesting a recount, but his request was denied. He then filed an election petition before the Sub-Divisional Magistrate under Section 12-C of the Uttar Pradesh Panchayat Raj Act, 1947, challenging the election result and seeking a recount.
During the proceedings, the appellant sought information under the Right to Information Act, 2005, requesting the presiding officer’s diary and other election-related records. However, the Election Office responded that the documents were missing and could not be located despite efforts to retrieve them.
The Sub-Divisional Magistrate, after considering the evidence, allowed the petition and ordered a recount of votes on October 31, 2022. The respondent, who had been declared the winning candidate, challenged this order by filing a revision petition, which was dismissed on November 5, 2022. He then filed a writ petition before the Allahabad High Court, which quashed the recount order on January 27, 2023.
The Supreme Court examined whether the Sub-Divisional Magistrate had properly exercised jurisdiction in ordering a recount. The court considered past judgments on when recounts can be permitted, emphasizing that secrecy of the ballot is paramount and should not be violated unless compelling grounds exist.
The court referred to its decision in Hussain Kamil Kidwai v. Ram Sewak Yadav, stating:
"An order for inspection of ballot papers cannot be granted to support vague pleas not backed by material facts. The case must be set out with precision, supported by averments of material facts. To establish such a case, an order for inspection may be granted if the interests of justice require it."
The court noted that the appellant’s allegations were specific and supported by affidavits, including those of two other candidates. It further observed that key election records, such as the presiding officer’s diary, were missing, which prevented verification of the official vote count.
The bench also referred to Vadivelu v. Sundaram, which held:
"Recount of votes should only be ordered in rare cases where specific allegations of irregularities in counting are made and supported by evidence. Secrecy of the ballot must be preserved unless it is proven that the election process has been materially affected."
The court found that the missing records and the affidavits supporting the appellant’s claims met this threshold. It further observed that the discrepancy of 19 votes was significant, given that the margin of victory was only 37 votes. The judgment stated:
"If the presiding officer’s records are missing and cannot be verified, the final result falls within the realm of questionability. The sanctity of each vote must be protected. Three of the four candidates in the election have raised concerns, reinforcing the need for a recount."
The court also took note of allegations that election officers had unlawfully canceled ballots favoring the appellant and that police personnel removed him from the polling area. It observed that these allegations, combined with missing records, provided sufficient grounds for allowing a recount.
The Supreme Court set aside the High Court’s judgment and restored the Sub-Divisional Magistrate’s order directing a recount. The final directive stated:
"The judgment of the High Court in Writ-C No. 35734 of 2022 titled Sunil Kumar v. State of U.P. & Ors. dated 27th January 2023 is set aside. The order dated 31st October 2022 passed by the Sub-Divisional Magistrate in Election Petition No. 0210 of 2021 is restored. The appeal is allowed."
The court directed the Registrar General of the Allahabad High Court to communicate the judgment to the concerned Magistrate, who must set a date for the recount after hearing the parties.
Case Title: Vijay Bahadur v. Sunil Kumar & Ors.
Neutral Citation: 2025 INSC 332
Case Number: Civil Appeal No. 14311 of 2024
Bench: Justice Sanjay Karol & Justice Nongmeikapam Kotiswar Singh
[Read/Download order]
