Maharashtra Results: Will Congress-led MVA Challenge the Results?

Maharashtra Results: Will EC Submit to Reason? 

Electoral behaviour of voters has its own internal logic: the general belief is that voters do not flip-flop irrationally unless they have a reason to do so. The question is: if the Congress party secured a handsome number of seats in the parliamentary elections in May-June 2024, why did it perform abysmally in some of the state assemblies where it had previously done well?

Bizarrely, such predictable voting behaviour has been frequently challenged by the results of elections held in the last few months. Congress and other opposition parties are claiming "foul play" and making allegations of manipulation of Electronic Voting Machines (EVMs). Is there any merit in these allegations?

For instance, Congress performed well in the 2024 parliamentary elections and was expected to carry its vastly improved electoral form into the assembly elections later in the year. This belief was based not only on assumptions about voter behaviour but also on the fact that the central government, headed by the Bharatiya Janata Party, had done little to address unemployment or inflation—two critical issues that anger voters and impact their electoral choices.

Despite these factors, Congress lost—not just in Haryana, four months after the parliamentary elections, but also in the crucial Maharashtra election five months after the June elections, where it was leading an alliance. In Haryana, Congress was in a direct fight with the BJP and lost. In Maharashtra, it was part of the INDIA Alliance, which had performed well in the 2024 general elections. Yet again, it suffered a significant defeat.

Maharashtra Results: Will Congress-led MVA Challenge the Results?

In Haryana, defeated Congress candidates have filed election petitions. Some of these candidates sought to stall the swearing-in of the new government, claiming that in 20 constituencies, there had been electoral malpractice or evident EVM manipulation. However, the court not only rejected their plea but also threatened to impose fines on the petitioners.

Many of these candidates had lost by narrow margins and hoped that their election petitions could swing the results in their favour. The harsh reality, however, is that election petitions rarely get resolved swiftly enough to provide timely justice to the litigants. Frustratingly for these candidates, trials in the High Court often stretch far beyond the stipulated six-month period, perpetuating a painful status quo.

Courts, in their attempt to avoid disrupting the electoral process, have been accused of creating doubts about the fairness of elections. Critics argue that if courts were to allow close scientific scrutiny of EVMs and offer voters the option to choose between ballot papers and EVMs, all such doubts could be dispelled. Instead, detractors claim, courts have supported the Election Commission of India (ECI) by prioritising its "preposterous" assertion that the use of ballot papers would delay election results. Critics further point out that the ECI already conducts staggered parliamentary elections over more than a month, demonstrating that it is in no rush to complete the process or install governments.

A similar narrative appeared to unfold after the Maharashtra results were announced. The Congress-led alliance, which included factions of the NCP and Shiv Sena, faced an unexpected defeat when every pollster had predicted either a close fight or a victory for the MVA against the BJP-led Mahayuti. The Congress-led alliance accused the Mahayuti of benefiting from a Supreme Court decision that failed to disqualify legislators who had defected from one party to another. The courts, they argued, legitimised political defections, thereby aiding the breakaway factions.

If the BJP-led alliance emerged victorious in Maharashtra, the credit, according to the opposition, lies in the favorable ecosystem created around it. 

There was little reason for the Maharashtra elections not to be held alongside those in Haryana and Jammu and Kashmir. However, the Election Commission (EC), in its infinite wisdom, decided to delay Maharashtra’s polls by a month. This delay gave the BJP-led government an opportunity to promote schemes like the Ladli Behna Yojana—a cash transfer program providing ₹1,500 directly into the accounts of poor women—just before the elections. The EC found no issue with the scheme and even permitted its extension until October 15.

Conventional wisdom suggests that the BJP-led alliance, which had been on the defensive after Congress’s strong performance in the June parliamentary elections, began displaying renewed aggression. Supporters of the Mahayuti argue that the alliance benefited significantly from the Ladli Behna Yojana, similar to how the BJP leveraged cash transfers to secure a last-minute victory in Madhya Pradesh. In MP, pre-election surveys had shown the BJP trailing Congress by 2–3 percentage points, but the BJP ultimately clinched victory, leaving Congress alleging EVM manipulation as the true cause of its defeat.

The Congress-led alliance is far from convinced about its loss following the announcement of the Maharashtra results. There are suggestions that it might leverage the Supreme Court’s latest order, which allows a recount of VVPAT (Voter Verifiable Paper Audit Trail) slips if the complainant pays ₹47,500 to the EC. While similar requests were made in Haryana, the EC declined to entertain them. Should the Congress-led alliance succeed in pressing for VVPAT recounts in Maharashtra, it could resolve several contentious issues.

If the allegations of the losing opposition are proven wrong, it would vindicate the EC’s stance. However, if the Congress-led alliance can demonstrate mismatches between votes polled and those counted, it would deal a severe blow to the credibility of the EC and the elections it conducts. The Supreme Court has repeatedly dismissed Public Interest Litigations (PILs) advocating for a return to ballot paper voting but has upheld its order permitting VVPAT recounts in cases of mismatches. As for Maharashtra results, there are reportedly numerous such instances.

The credibility of Indian democracy hinges on whether the courts can compel the EC to adhere to this order. If neither the courts nor the EC bend to pressure, Congress might escalate its dissent by launching a nationwide agitation against the use of EVMs in elections.