Bengaluru, June 30: Congress leaders who were complaining EVM hacking for losing the recent assembly elections in Karnataka have now taken the matter to the High Court of Karnataka.

Former Congress MLA of Mangaluru South J.R.Lobo who was defeated by BJP's Vedavyas Kamath was the first to file a petition in Karnataka High Court on Thursday. He has alleged that EVMs have been tampered with in his constituency.

Following Lobo's petition, three more Congress leaders who have lost the recent assembly elections have also filed the petition in high court with the same allegation. They are M.K.Somashekar, who lost from Krishnaraja of Mysore , Vasu who lost Chamaraja in Mysore and B.A.Mohiuddin Bava , who was defeated in Mangaluru North. All the four constituencies have been won by BJP candidates.

C.S.Arun Machaiah who lost from Madikeri constituency as Congress candidate has also said that he will go to court with the same grievance. Many other defeated Congress MLAs have also alleged that they have lost due to EVM malfunctioning or tampering. They are also expected to file petition soon in the court.

Congress under Chief Minister Siddaramaiah was confident of coming back to power in Karnataka. Many surveys had also suggested that there is no anti incumbency wave against Siddaramaiah government and Congress has a clear edge. But the election results came as a rude shock to ruling Congress where it slipped to 78 seats whereas BJP which was not expected to do very well jumped from 40 to 104 seats.

Following the results many prominent congress leaders started complaining about possible EVM tampering. For the first time , even AICC seriously discussed the issue. Now Congress leaders seem to have made up their mind to take the matter to court and fight against EVMs.




Let the Truth be known. If you read VB and like VB, please be a VB Supporter and Help us deliver the Truth to one and all.



New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Monday upheld the inclusion of the words ‘socialist’ and ‘secular’ in the Preamble of the Constitution, confirming their retrospective application from November 26, 1949. The court ruled that the power to amend the Constitution under Article 368 extends to the Preamble, which is an integral part of the document.

A Bench led by Chief Justice of India Sanjiv Khanna stated, “The power under Article 368 cannot be curtailed. It will equally apply to the Preamble.” The 42nd Constitutional Amendment, which introduced these terms in 1976 during the Emergency, was challenged on grounds of its retrospective application and the lack of states’ ratification.

The petitioners, including BJP leader Subramanian Swamy, argued that the amendment forced a particular economic theory on the nation and violated the original intent of the Constitution. Advocate Ashwini Kumar Upadhyay contended that the Preamble reflects the will of the people at the time of adoption in 1949 and is therefore unalterable.

The court dismissed these objections, affirming that both socialism and secularism are part of the Constitution's Basic Structure. The Bench clarified that socialism refers to a welfare state ensuring equality of opportunity without negating private sector participation or individualism. It emphasised that secularism is embedded in the Constitution, particularly in the principles of equality and fraternity.

Chief Justice Khanna remarked, “Secularism has always been a core feature of the Constitution.” He added that the amendment did not impose socialism as dogma but aligned with the welfare goals enshrined in various constitutional provisions.