Amidst intense political heat in the bustling streets of Delhi, Arun Kumar Garg, a dedicated Congress worker, diligently prepares a group of ground-level party members for the upcoming booth agent responsibilities in the national capital. The scorching summer sun fails to deter Garg’s unwavering spirit as he emphasizes the crucial need for well-trained polling agents, fully equipped to handle various aspects, including the functioning of Electronic Voting Machines (EVMs) and the much-debated Form 17 C.
Form 17 C, in its essence, is a stamped certificate issued to each candidate’s polling agent by the presiding officer of a specific polling booth. It contains vital information such as the absolute number of votes cast at that booth during the polling day, alongside the total number of registered electors and other relevant details. However, this seemingly straightforward document has ignited a fiery debate between the Opposition and civil society groups on one side and the Election Commission of India (ECI) on the other in the lead-up to the 2024 general elections.
The primary grievance of the Opposition stems from the ECI’s departure from its past practice of releasing absolute voter turnout numbers for each constituency. In contrast to the previous general elections held in 2019, only voting percentages have been disclosed in the ongoing polls, and that too with a significant delay in the initial phases. The ECI steadfastly maintains that Form 17 C (Part 1), which includes the sought-after absolute vote count details, is intended solely for candidates and their polling agents, not for public consumption or media scrutiny.
In a strongly worded letter to Congress President Mallikarjun Kharge, the poll body asserted, “It may be noted that the Commission is not legally bound to publish any voter turnout data at an aggregate level of a constituency, a state, or a phase of election because voter turnout is recorded at the polling station level in statutory Form 17 C, which is prepared by the presiding officer and signed by the polling agents of candidates present. Copies of Form 17 C are shared with polling agents present immediately as the strongest measure of transparency. Therefore, candidates are aware and in possession of exact voter turnout data in absolute numbers even before it is known to the ECI.”
However, a pertinent question arises: Do all candidates, particularly those from the Opposition, possess the resources to deploy polling agents in each and every booth across their constituencies? “No,” declares Congress Rajya Sabha MP Shakti Singh Gohil, a seasoned campaigner with deep grassroots experience, especially in his home state of Gujarat. He elaborates, “A single constituency typically comprises around 2,000-2,200 booths. Each polling agent must be present at their designated booth at approximately 5:30 AM on election day for a dry run to verify EVM functionality and reconcile serial numbers. Actual polling commences at 7 AM and continues until around 6 PM, following which the agent receives a copy of Form 17 C (Part 1), duly stamped by the presiding officer and signed by polling agents representing all candidates.”
Consequently, Gohil emphasizes the need for a candidate to field at least two agents per booth – one to remain present throughout the day and another to provide relief for meals and breaks. This translates to a staggering requirement of approximately 6,000 polling agents for each constituency. The prevailing allowance for these agents, according to most ground workers, ranges from ₹1,000 to ₹1,200 each to cover their meals and transportation expenses. Gohil contends, “This clearly demonstrates the financial constraints faced by smaller parties and many independent candidates, making it virtually impossible for them to deploy polling agents at every single booth.”
Jagdeep Chhokar, founding member of the election watchdog Association for Democratic Reforms (ADR), concurs with Gohil’s assessment. He recounts his personal experience, stating, “I did not encounter a single polling agent at the booth where I cast my vote.” The ADR has proactively approached the Supreme Court, seeking an order to mandate the ECI to upload Form 17 C on its website as soon as it is stamped and signed by the Presiding Officer. The Supreme Court has scheduled a hearing for May 24th to consider the ADR’s plea.
A separate group of civil society members also met with the Election Commission and submitted a petition echoing the demand for transparency. Anjali Bharadwaj, Director of Common Cause, who participated in the delegation, outlined three specific concerns that have fueled skepticism this time around. “The ECI has always disclosed absolute voter turnout figures, but this time, they are only releasing percentages. Furthermore, the turnout numbers are usually announced within 24 hours of polling, but there has been an unusual delay this time. Additionally, the increase in voter turnout reflected in the final figures appears to be unusually high,” she observed.
“Our request is simple: upload a scanned copy of Form 17 C as soon as it is submitted by the Presiding Officer to ensure transparency,” Bharadwaj emphasized.
Senior Election Commission officials and former insiders, however, vehemently dismiss any possibility of data tampering at the booth level. Former Chief Election Commissioner O P Rawat asserts that polling teams are carefully randomized and assigned to their respective booths only on the eve of elections. This randomization, coupled with the fact that polling officials are drawn from diverse backgrounds such as government schools and public sector banks, minimizes the likelihood of any wrongdoing. Rawat further explains that on counting day, the EVMs are first tallied using QR codes and then physically opened for verification.
Nevertheless, ground workers from Opposition parties continue to raise concerns about the adequacy of training provided to these officials. Rajesh Garg, head of the Delhi Pradesh Congress Committee’s training department, questions, “Just like polling agents, these officials also undergo rushed training.” He believes that “unless the ECI releases the absolute numbers, doubts will persist in the minds of the public.” Interestingly, Rawat acknowledges the validity of this argument, stating, “There is no harm in disclosing the details.”
As the 2024 Lok Sabha elections reach their peak, the debate over Form 17 C and the larger issue of electoral transparency rages on. The Opposition and civil society groups remain staunch in their demand for greater openness, while the ECI steadfastly defends its position. The outcome of this ongoing tussle will undoubtedly shape the public’s trust in the integrity of the electoral process.
