The Supreme Court on Tuesday (September 1, 2026) sought the Centre’s response on the use of ‘totalisers’, which are machines designed to consolidate and count votes from multiple Electronic Voting Machine (EVM) Control Units simultaneously without revealing booth-wise voting trends, as a “fall-back option”.
The EC pointed out that there was a complete absence of a legal framework — neither the Representation of the People Act nor the Conduct of Election Rules,1961 or any allied enactment contain any provision recognising, regulating or governing the use of a totaliser in counting votes. The court’s order to the Union government came despite a warning from the Election Commission of India that bringing in totalisers now, when even EVMs are subject to frequent public questioning, may not be the right move.
“It is relevant to state that the present time is one in which the functioning and integrity of EVMs are still a subject of frequent public questioning… In such a climate, the introduction of new and as yet unregulated mechanisms such as totaliser could give rise to fresh allegations and controversy, thereby further complicating public confidence in an already sensitive area of the electoral process,” the Election Commission (EC) cautioned. The EC said substantive amendments and revision of statutory procedure governing the counting of votes would have to be made to include totalisers in the electoral process.
“The response from political parties to totalisers is a big ‘no’. Only the Law Commission of India, in its 255th report, suggested their selective use,” senior advocate Seshadhri Naidu, for the Election Commission, submitted. The court was hearing a petition filed by advocate Ashwini Kumar Upadhyay, who argued that totalisers would safeguard the privacy of individual voters and protect them from reprisals. Mr. Currently, polling as well as counting is conducted in the presence of the candidates and their agents. They are provided an opportunity through Form 17C to match vote count at the end of polling and after counting at every polling station. Form 17C data comparisons are also used at the time of adjudications before election tribunals and courts.
Three out of six national parties and 18 out of 29 State parties opposed the idea of totaliser.
Upadhyay said political parties victimise voters at the local level after identifying voting patterns in particular polling booths. EC, in an affidavit, said totalisers would reduce transparency. “EVMs clubbed together would stand concealed within the aggregate figure, and would become incapable of being identified, or independently verified by any party to the election… Totaliser, by its very design, aggregates the votes recorded across polling booths at a single point without preserving a distinct booth-wise, machine-wise trail,” the EC said.
