What triggered the abuse?

The incident occurred on Tuesday, July 8, after school staff allegedly discovered bloodstains in a washroom. Instead of handling the situation with discretion and sensitivity, the school principal decided to launch a public and humiliating investigation. According to the police, the girls were herded into the school’s convention hall, where they were shown images of the bloodstains via a projector and asked to identify whether they were on their periods, as reported in The Indian Express.

“Who Is Menstruating?”- Thumbprints and strip searches

Those who disclosed they were menstruating were asked to submit their thumb impressions. Girls who said they were not were taken, one by one, to the washroom by a female attendant who allegedly forced them to remove their clothes and undergo a physical inspection to confirm if they were telling the truth, according to NDTV. One parent of a Class 7 student spoke to Times of India and said, “My daughter came home trembling. She told me she was forced to undress in the washroom, in front of other students. This isn’t discipline; it’s mental harassment”.

Police action and legal charges

According to Thane (Rural) Additional Superintendent of Police Rahul Zalte, the parents protested outside the school premises on Wednesday, demanding strict action against the school staff involved. The police promptly registered an FIR against eight individuals, including the principal, four teachers, the woman attendant, and two trustees.

The accused have been charged under the BNS Sections 74 (assault or use of criminal force to woman with intent to outrage her modesty) and 76 (assault or use of criminal force to woman with intent to disrobe), in addition to relevant provisions of the POCSO Act, as reported by Free Press Journal.

On Wednesday evening, the principal and attendant were arrested, and the school management dismissed the principal from her post, officials confirmed. A senior police officer said both women would be produced before a court on Thursday, according to the report of Mumbai Mirror.

Students left traumatised

A particularly harrowing detail emerged when one girl, who had denied menstruating, was accused by the principal of lying. She was reportedly asked, “Why are you using a sanitary pad if you’re not menstruating?” and then forced to give her thumbprint under coercion. Many girls reportedly went home crying and mentally disturbed, revealing the trauma to their families. Parents and local child rights groups have labelled the incident mental and physical abuse, demanding further criminal prosecution and inquiry by the Maharashtra State Commission for Protection of Child Rights (MSCPCR).

Thane Rural Police have stated that they are currently recording statements from students and witnesses. “We are taking the testimonies of other children and school staff, and gathering all electronic and forensic evidence,” said an investigating officer, while speaking to India Today.

Related:

A Silent Emergency: Farmer suicides surge in Maharashtra amid apathy, debt, and systemic collapse

Beed to Delhi: Lawyer beaten in Maharashtra, judge threatened in Delhi—what the path for justice means for women practioners in today’s India

When Courts Fail Survivors: How patriarchy shapes justice in sexual offence against women cases

Surviving Communal Wrath: Women who have defied the silence, demanded accountability from the state

The post Thane School Horror: Principal, attendant arrested for forcing girls to strip in menstruation check, case registered under POCSO appeared first on SabrangIndia.

The order comes amidst a heated legal and political debate surrounding the ECI’s stringent revision process, initiated just months before the Bihar Assembly elections in November 2025. Petitioners, represented by a formidable legal team, argued that the current guidelines are arbitrary, discriminatory, and threaten the fundamental right to vote for millions. What is being debated and questioned is whether, the ECI, under political pressure, is using the SIR to determine a person’s citizenship. The next date for hearing will now be July 28.

Special Intensive Revision: an unprecedented exercise without legal basis  

The petitioners, led by Senior Advocates Gopal Sankarnarayanan (for ADR), Kapil Sibal (for RJD MP Manoj Jha), Abhishek Manu Singhvi, Shadan Farasat, and Vrinda Grover, launched a multi-pronged argument on the ECI’s impugned exercise.

Senior Advocate Gopal Sankarnarayanan set the tone by questioning the very legality of the “Special Intensive Revision.” He argued, “What is permitted under the Act of 1950 and the registration of electors rules is two types of revisions. Intensive revision and summary revision.” He stressed that this “special intensive revision,” covering an astonishing 7.9 crore people in Bihar, is a “de novo exercise” being undertaken “for the first time in the history of India” and lacks any explicit backing in law. Sankarnarayanan pointed out the inherent contradiction in the ECI’s approach, which, despite annual summary revisions in other states, has now embarked on this “special” drive with a strict 30-day timeline.

Arbitrary distinctions and discriminatory safeguards

A key grievance raised by Sankarnarayanan was the arbitrary differentiation between voters.

“They gave the clarification that if you are in the 2003 roll then you don’t have to submit the documents but you still have to submit a fresh form. If you don’t submit that fresh form you are out of the electoral roll,” he explained.

This, he argued, created an “artificial distinction which the law doesn’t permit,” particularly by presuming citizenship for pre-2003 voters while demanding extensive documentation from those enrolled later, even if they had voted in multiple elections. The petitioners also highlighted discriminatory “safeguards” that exempted certain classes like “members of the judiciary and people proficient in arts, people who are great in sports etc.,” allowing officials to collect forms from their homes, while ordinary citizens faced stringent requirements.

The burden of proof and citizenship Screening

The core of the petitioners’ concern revolved around the shifting of the burden of proving citizenship from the state to the individual voter. Senior Advocate Kapil Sibal strongly argued, “The burden is not on me to prove citizenship. Before they remove me from electoral roll they have to show that they have some document in their possession that proves that I am not a citizen.”  Besides, the ECI is a constitutional body mandated to conduct, oversee free and fair elections, including ensuring every person votes and those who are not do not; however it is not the competent authority to decide citizenship.

Sibal highlighted the impracticality for many citizens, especially migrants and the poor, to furnish the required documents, citing a Bihar government survey showing low possession rates for passports (2.5%) and matriculation certificates (14.71%). Sibal expressed dismay at the exclusion of Aadhaar, MNREGA cards, and even birth certificates, questioning, “Where will I get birth certificate of parents? This exercise is beyond the scope of Election Commission of India completely.”

Senior Advocate Abhishek Manu Singhvi stated that “this is absolutely an exercise of doing citizenship screening,” which falls under a different legal procedure and outside the ECI’s direct purview. He pointedly questioned the ECI’s stance on Aadhaar: “The entire country is going mad after Aadhaar and then ECI says that Aadhaar will not be taken.” Advocate Vrinda Grover further emphasised that this “citizenship screening… is disproportionately targeting the poor, the migrants. Article 14 squarely comes in here.”

Threat to democratic principles

The overarching concern for the petitioners was the potential for mass disenfranchisement and its corrosive effect on democratic principles. Singhvi powerfully articulated, “Disenfranchising even one eligible voter hits level playing field, that hits democracy and that directly hits basic structure.”

The timing of the exercise, so close to the Bihar Assembly elections, also raised eyebrows, with Singhvi suggesting it “should be delinked with an impending election.”

ECI’s Defence: Constitutional mandate and statutory power

Representing the ECI, Senior Advocates Rakesh Dwivedi, K.K. Venugopal, and Maninder Singh, defended the revision as a necessary exercise to maintain the purity and accuracy of the electoral rolls.

Senior Advocate Rakesh Dwivedi asserted the ECI’s constitutional authority under Article 324 and statutory power under Section 21(3) of the Representation of the People Act, 1950, to conduct such revisions. He argued that the ECI “cannot and does not have any intent whatsoever to exclude anybody from the voter list unless and until the hands of the commission are compelled by the provision of law itself.”

He cited data indicating significant changes in the electoral roll, including 1.1 crore deaths and 70 lakh migrations, as necessitating an intensive revision.

Assurances of due process and hearings

A critical assurance from Dwivedi was that all the procedure will be followed all principles of natural justice will be followed. When pressed by Justice Dhulia on whether hearings on objections (in case of exclusion) would be granted, Dwivedi affirmed, “of course.” He clarified that pre-filled forms based on the January 2025 electoral roll are being distributed, and signatures are being collected door-to-door, implying that existing voters are not being ignored. He assured that only after all application forms are received would the stage of objections and claims begin, at which point Aadhaar could be used if an identity objection is raised.

Aadhaar as proof of identity, not citizenship

On the contentious issue of Aadhaar, Dwivedi initially clarified that “It is not a proof of certain things. It is only proof of identity.” He maintained that Aadhaar, while widely prevalent, does not automatically confer citizenship, as it can be issued to all residents. However, he also stated that the list of 11 documents was “not exhaustive,” which allowed the bench to question why Aadhaar, a document that often forms the basis for other listed documents like caste certificates, was excluded. His flip-flop on ration cards—initially conceding the list was non-exhaustive, then saying, “We will not accept ration card”—drew a sharp observation from the bench.

Bench’s observations and directives: a pragmatic approach

The two-judge bench of Justices Sudhanshu Dhulia and Joymalya Bagchi engaged actively with both sides, making several important observations.

Questioning the timing and purpose

Justice Bagchi repeatedly questioned the ECI on the timing of the exercise while saying that, “that’s why the question is why you are making this exercise relatable to an election coming in November. If it is an exercise that can be independent of the election for the whole of the country.”

Justice Dhulia concurred, remarking, “If you are to check citizenship under the SIR of electoral rolls in Bihar, then you should have acted early; it is a bit late.” He further observed, “The right to vote… there is no question that this issue is an important issue and goes through the very root of democracy.”

Focus on identity vs. citizenship

The bench noted the ECI’s conflicting stance on documents. Justice Bagchi highlighted, “all the documents you have listed are related to identity. The entire exercise is about identity.” He pressed Dwivedi that “Why citizenship? Only identity. None of these illustrative documents that you listed or by themselves proof of citizenship.”

Justice Dhulia pointedly remarked, “A document that is the basis of so many other documents you are not allowing,” referring to Aadhaar.

Practicality and perception

Justice Dhulia also raised practical concerns about the short timeline and the potential for inadvertent omissions, stating, “We have serious doubt on whether you can follow this timeline. Remember you have to follow the procedure. It is something that is not practical.” He also highlighted the “matter of perception” created by the ECI’s actions.

No stay, but clear observations

Despite the petitioners’ strong arguments, the Supreme Court opted not to grant an interim stay at this juncture, primarily because the draft electoral roll is scheduled for publication only on August 1, 2025, and the matter is listed for further hearing before that date. This pragmatic decision allows the ECI to continue its data collection while ensuring judicial oversight.

The Court’s Order explicitly stated that “Mr. Dwivedi submits that the list of 11 documents is not exhaustive as the order June indicates then it is our view that the Election Commission will also consider the following documents such as the Aadhaar card, the EPIC voter ID card issued by the Election Commission, and ration card.”

The order further specified that a counter-affidavit from the ECI must be filed within one week, and any rejoinder before July 28, 2025, the date of the next hearing. The Court acknowledged the three key points of challenge; the ECI’s power to conduct the SIR, the procedure adopted, and the timeline.

However, the Supreme Court’s clear directive marks a significant development in the Bihar electoral roll controversy. While the ECI avoided an immediate stay, the implicit message is that the purity of electoral rolls cannot come at the cost of excluding genuine voters through overly restrictive or legally ambiguous processes. The onus is now on the ECI to demonstrate its willingness to incorporate the Court’s suggestions and address the petitioners’ concerns regarding fundamental rights. The July 28 hearing promises to be a crucial juncture, determining not only the fate of Bihar’s electoral rolls but also setting a precedent for future revisions across the nation, especially as elections approach.

SC order can be read here.

Related:

SC: ECI’s ‘wisdom’ on revision of electoral rolls challenged, does a disenfranchisement crisis loom over Bihar, with thousands being declared ‘‘D’ (doubtful) voters?

Bihar: Sinister move by ECI as ‘intensive’ revision of electoral roles set to exclude vast majority of legitimate voters

Bihar 2025 Election: EC drops parental birth document requirement for 4.96 crore electors and their children in Bihar

The post Bihar:  SC signals that ECI should consider Aadhaar, EPIC (Voter ID card) & Ration card for electoral roll revision  appeared first on SabrangIndia.

On July 4, 2025, hundreds of students, parents, regular BEST commuters, old, young, activists from Aamchi Mumbai Aamchi BEST, Fridays For Future Mumbai, Habitat and Livelihood Welfare Association, Humanist Centre, Jan Haq Sangharsh Samiti, Lokraj Sanghatana, Loktantrik Kamgar Union, Mulbhut Adhikar Sangharsh Samiti, Nagari Niwara Vichar Manch, Naujawan Bharat Sabha, Nivrut Kamgar Sanghatan, Pudhe Chala and Purogami Mahila Sanghatana gathered at the Mumbai, Wadala depot, demanding that, public transport is an issue of survival and livelihood for most of the commuters and hence, Mumbai’s lifeline BEST (public bus transport) service be considered as inviolable right of citizens.

They collectively submitted their demands to BEST authorities, the major demands being:

• The fare hike be immediately rescinded and restored to earlier levels.
• The decision to monetise depots be cancelled and BEST land be retained exclusively for BEST’s use.
• The February 2024 decision of the Municipal Commissioner be implemented so the BEST can henceforward be subsidised and operated as part of the BMC Budget.
• BEST discontinues wet-leasing and immediately purchase and operate its own buses to maintain a fleet of at least 6000 buses to meet the needs of commuters in the city.

Several activists and leaders addressed those Mumbaikars who had gathered. Speakers maintained that public transport is an inviolable right of citizens of the city. For decades. The BEST bus service has been a lifeline for the people of Mumbai, as it ensured that working people can travel to work, to schools and colleges, to hospitals, and for other needs of city life with safety, efficiency, and affordability. That is why Mumbaikars once used to love BEST as their own.

However, of late, over the past few years, in the name of “cutting losses,” BEST has increasingly brought in private contractors, doubled bus fares, reduced the bus fleet, and have thereby deepened the crisis — and it is the ordinary Mumbaikar who is paying the price.

Many commuters, including parents who drop and pick up children from school, students travelling to colleges and universities, patients travelling to public hospitals spoke about how doubling of the fare has led to major increase in their expenses and how they are finding it difficult to cope. The average daily BEST ridership dropped by at least 10%, after the fare hike, (nearly doubled) on May 9, 2025.[1]

One senior trade union leader Mr Ranga Satose, in fact, informed the protestors as to how Maharashtra Government has decided to monetise BEST properties, under the pretext of losses incurred. He said, that “Deputy Chief Minister Mr. Eknath Shinde held meeting in month of April 2025, and has decided to monetise all BEST assets, which includes 375 acres land.”

BMC the richest civic body in India, with ₹74,427 crore budget[2] for year of 2025: Public transport is not profit-making venture but the citizens’ right to affordable transportation

The Brihanmumbai Municipal Corporation (BMC) estimates a revenue income of Rs 43,159.40 crore for the fiscal year 2025-26, according to the Free Press Journal. This figure represents a 20.73% increase compared to the revised estimates for the previous year.[3]  The BEST transport division’s losses were covered by the more lucrative electricity division till 2017. But following a court order in November 2016, the cross-subsidy to the transport division came to halt.

Wet leasing: Contractualisation proposed to reduce losses

In 2018, BEST introduced wet leasing. Sudas Sawant, Public Relations Officer of BEST, explained that under the wet-leasing arrangement, contractors own and operate buses, and are also responsible for staff recruitment, fuel and maintenance of buses. In return, BEST pays the contractors a fixed amount per kilometre of transport.[4]

However, to the contrary, contractualiastion has led to further losses, along with an increase in accidents, poor and irregular service. The cost recovery index (according to annual operational and financial data of BEST) which was 2013-14 60 % has gone down to 25 % in 2022-23 (After introducing PPP model of wet leasing)

The memorandum submitted by the organisations clearly reveals the problem created by wet leasing.

2021 and 2022 – There was a justified strikes of wet-lease workers for the non-payment of wages in various depots, including Mumbai Central, Magathane, Kurla, Vikhroli, Wadala, and Bandra. This caused hundreds of buses at a time to be taken off the roads and led to widespread suffering by commuters. In September 2022 the BEST general manager himself sent a letter to the MP group of contractors reprimanding them for the frequent strikes by staff and for the frequent breakdowns.

2022 and 2023 – Due to improper maintenance, there were fires in a number of buses, including in Bandra, Andheri and Kandivali. As a result, in February 2023 the BEST management took 400 wet leased buses off the roads, again resulting in distress for commuters.

August 2023 – Again a massive justifiable strike of BEST wet-lease workers was called –workers ‘employed’ by different contractors– for various demands including a living wage. Over 1,000 buses were off the roads for seven days, disrupting the life of the city. The workers ended the strike on some assurances by the Government, but these were not fulfilled.

Of the 2,100 electric buses to be supplied by the private contractor Evey to BEST by August 2023, only 185 were supplied, a year after the deadline.

The real purpose behind Contractualisation: Selling family silver

The BEST did not diminish itself; it was deliberately done in.

In 2011-12, it was a proud public utility with a fleet of 4,700 buses ferrying 4.2 million a day. By 2023, its fleet was barely 2,964 with 3.5 million commuters; importantly, less than a third of the fleet was owned and operated by the BEST as the wet lease model took hold. In May 2025, only a fifth of the 2,600 buses were owned by the organization. The BEST-owned bus fleet has dipped to its lowest-ever at 795 buses. With 60-70 buses being phased out every month, the fleet will become zero this year or by early next year.[5]

The memorandum submitted by the organisations’ states that:

“The wet-lease model has already proved to be an unmitigated failure for BEST. Even with a largely privatised fleet, the transport division recorded a loss of Rs 2,160.17 crore in 2022–23. This model has also imposed social costs—ranging from service breakdowns and accidents to increased wait times and falling ridership,”

“Private contractors often compromise on safety and maintenance to boost profits. The result: more breakdowns, bus fires, and fatal accidents. Drivers are overworked, underpaid, and frequently untrained, putting passengers at risk. The experience of wet leasing has been negative for both commuters and workers. Fares have surged without delivering any tangible benefits. Service quality has deteriorated, especially in low-income areas. Long routes have been cut, leaving passengers stranded and forcing them to switch buses or transport modes—raising commute time and costs,”

The cumulative losses of BEST stand at around Rs 9,300 crore.[6] To make good, the organisation intends to sell or pawn its family silver – land parcels totalling more than 126 hectares, some at prime locations, across Mumbai. Back in 2017, incidentally when the privatisation began, international consultants PwC had valued the land at Rs 5,170 to Rs 6,160 crore, citizens’ groups point out. A few of its 27 bus depots have been monetised. Commercial developers have constructed plush towers; Mumbai got nothing from the public land. In a city rapidly privatising land, this fits the larger agenda.[7]

Complete disregard for Public Transport: complete lack of planning or feasibility studies

Local Railway

The average number of daily commuters on the western, central and harbour lines stood at 7.06 million[8]. In local railways due to massive overcrowding, nearly 7 persons get killed and another 7 persons, on an average, are injured daily.[9] There has been no attempt to improve the signalling system or introduce additional lines for local trains.

On June 9, 2025, near Mumbra five commuters lost their lives, when two overcrowded two trains passed each other in opposite direction.[10]  As a knee jerk reaction, Central Railway wants 800 Mumbai offices to change their work hours: Changing office timings will make it possible to manage crowds and make train journey of Mumbaikars safer, CR’s letter says[11]

Introduction of AC local trains: added disaster

Currently, CR operates 66 air-conditioned local train services in the Mumbai suburban section on weekdays, out of a total of 1,810 suburban services.

In a recent affidavit submitted to the High Court by Central Railways, highlights that the introduction of AC trains has led to a reduction in the capacity to run similar trains for similar destinations compared to non-AC trains. The affidavit further states that the door-closing and opening process of AC trains takes additional time, reducing the number of trains that can be operated on the same route.[12] Due to time constraints many non-AC commuters are forced to travel in AC trains and according to July 9, 2025 Loksatta, the railways have fined such commuters in just last 8 months to the tune of 63 lakhs. 

Unplanned introduction of Electric bikes: No feasibility study undertaken

In clear indication of shirking the responsibility of providing affordable public transport, the State government has given green signal to private two wheelers taxis, adding further to traffic vows.  On July 4, the state government notified the Maharashtra Bike-Taxi Rules, 2025, clearing the way for app-based aggregators to begin operations.[13]

Using public money and providing all the transport facilities at no cost to the richest of the city and country.

The Coastal road which is 8-lane, 29.2 km long road, which is developed at the cost of 13000-14000 crores, serves only private vehicles and taxis. Ordinary people availing public transport cannot use it. Still such an enormous amount of money is poured into it.

The Samruddhi Mahamarg expressway project in Maharashtra is estimated to have cost ₹55,000 crore. This 701-kilometer expressway aims to significantly reduce travel time between Mumbai and Nagpur, cutting it from 16 hours to approximately 8 hours. Western Dedicated Freight Corridor. Furthermore, some districts throughout the Expressway will receive easy access to Jawaharlal Nehru Port Trust. It is also being promoted by Adani Reality.

The estimated cost for the Western Dedicated Freight Corridor (WDFC) is Rs 72,000 crore. This project is part of a larger nationwide logistics overhaul, with the total cost of the Dedicated Freight Corridor (DFC) project estimated at Rs 1.24 lakh crore. The WDFC connects Khurja to Jawaharlal Nehru Port in Maharashtra.

The “Shaktipeeth Expressway,” a proposed 802 km, six-lane, access-controlled expressway, estimated to cost ₹86,300 crore, aims to connect Nagpur with Patradevi on the Goa border, traversing 12 districts. This route is designed to facilitate the trade of Goa’s coal and minerals for two industrialists, Mr. Ambani and Mr Adani, to allow them to exploit the abundant minerals found in Konkan.  Farmers are protesting, fearing displacement and loss of fertile agricultural land. But the project is still on.

Development of Metros at enormous cost: non-affordable transport

Mumbai’s first-ever underground Metro is expected to begin operations in a phased manner starting in October, according to state agency officials. The Rs 37,276 crore project is likely to become fully operational in 2025.[14]

Mumbai’s metro network is set for a major expansion with MMRDA’s Rs. 10,970 crore budget for FY 2025–26.[15]

Mumbai’s Metro, once seen as the key to solving the transport chaos of the sprawling metropolis, is faltering with low ridership, high costs and poor integration — demanding a seamless approach to transform urban mobility[16]

Metro tickets ranging from Rs 10 to Rs 60 for a trip, with no season ticket subsidy is not an affordable mode of transport foe majority of working people in Mumbai.

The BEST buses constitute an essential and vital public service that keeps Mumbai moving and urgently needs to be supported through budgetary grants. Public transport must not be run for profit. Measures to improve efficiency and financial sustainability should serve the objective of increasing ridership, and not undermine it. Fare hikes, privatisation and land sales are ruinous for Mumbai and its common citizens.

(The author is an activist with Aamchi Mumbai Aamchi Best, a citizens network)

[1] https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/mumbai/best-daily-ridership-drops-10-as-officials-fear-more-may-migrate-to-other-modes/articleshow/121170354.cms

[2] https://www.hindustantimes.com/cities/mumbai-news/brihanmumbai-municipal-corporation-presents-rs-74-427-crore-budget-for-202526-101738660999780.html

[3] https://www.financialexpress.com/budget/bmc-budget-2025-live-updates-mumbai-municipal-budget-2025-allocations-for-all-sectors-3736971/#:~:text=As%20of%20December%2031%2C%202024,revised%20estimate%20for%202024%2D25.

[4] https://citizenmatters.in/mumbai-public-transport-best-bus-contract-issues/

[5] https://questionofcities.org/mumbais-best-is-being-killed-the-political-will-to-revive-it-is-absent/

[6] https://www.hindustantimes.com/cities/mumbai-news/bests-losses-mount-from-6-400-crore-to-9-200-crore-in-2-years-101732821142988.html

[7] https://questionofcities.org/mumbais-best-is-being-killed-the-political-will-to-revive-it-is-absent/

[8] https://www.hindustantimes.com/cities/mumbai-news/suburban-railway-ridership-inches-back-to-pre-pandemic-levels-101730056826516.html

[9] https://www.hindustantimes.com/cities/mumbai-news/7-people-lose-their-lives-on-railway-tracks-in-mumbai-every-day-101749496588283.html

[10] https://www.hindustantimes.com/cities/mumbai-news/mumbra-train-incident-accident-exposes-deadly-commuting-crisis-on-central-railway-101750531475489.html

[11] https://www.news18.com/cities/central-railways-requests-800-mumbai-offices-to-change-work-hours-to-reduce-crowding-on-trains-ws-kl-9427653.html

[12] https://www.freepressjournal.in/mumbai/mumbai-ac-local-trains-reduce-capacity-for-additional-services-in-suburban-section-cr-affidavit-reveals

[13] https://indianexpress.com/article/cities/mumbai/electric-bike-taxis-now-legal-in-maharashtra-heres-what-the-rules-say-10114038/

[14] https://www.business-standard.com/india-news/mumbai-s-first-under-ground-metro-to-start-partial-operations-next-week-124092501001_1.html

[15] https://railanalysis.in/rail-news/mmrda-allocates-around-rs-10970-crore-for-metro-projects-in-fy-2025-26-budget/

[16] https://thesecretariat.in/article/metro-is-falling-short-mumbai-needs-multi-modal-transit

Related:

Citizens and experts rally to save Mumbai’s BEST buses from privatisation pitfalls

BEST strike over Diwali bonus shakes Mumbai’s Bus Service, reveals growing transit strain

Citizens take a stand to keep Aamchi BEST alive

The post Mumbai’s Second Lifeline in ICU: Mumbaikars respond to call of “Save BEST” appeared first on SabrangIndia.

Despite repeated objections from Opposition MLAs and an avalanche of detailed public submissions, the bill has been introduced with only minor linguistic tweaks. The government’s refusal to alter any of the substantive and dangerous provisions has confirmed what many feared: that the Joint Committee process was never meant to revise the bill, rather it was meant to legitimise it.

At the heart of this legislation lies a simple premise: dissent equals danger. Vague terms like “left wing extremist organisation” and “urban Naxal” remain central to the Bill’s design, but are never defined, giving the state unchecked discretion to label student groups, protest movements, civil rights organisations, even opposition-linked collectives, as threats.

The dissent note, backed by detailed legal analysis, concludes that cosmetic changes have been used to mask the retention of core authoritarian powers, including preventive detention, financial surveillance, asset forfeiture, and police immunity.

Key concerns raised by opposition members, civil society, and constitutional experts have been ignored or side-stepped. The Joint Committee has made only three formal amendments to the earlier format of the MSPS bill, which are:

1. Rewording the objective clause to target “radical Left-wing organisations or similar organisations”;
2. Recasting the composition of the Advisory Board;
3. Raising the investigating officer’s rank from Sub-Inspector to Deputy Superintendent of Police.

The final bill still:

• Grants the executive the power to brand organisations as “unlawful” without fair process;
• Criminalises routine dissent under vague definitions of “unlawful activity”;
• Enables property seizure, eviction, and financial ruin through non-judicial mechanisms;
• Excludes lower courts from jurisdiction, effectively cutting off accessible judicial remedies;
• Provides blanket immunity to state officials acting “in good faith”;
• Lays the ground for an ideologically driven crackdown on opposition groups, activists, and movements.

Summary of the amended Bill is as follows:

I. Purpose and Framing: Criminalising dissent as extremism

The revised objective of the bill now targets: “unlawful activities of Left Wing Extremist organisations or similar organisations.”

This change merely replaces generality with ideological bias, introducing undefined political terms into law. Phrases such as “Left Wing Extremist” or “similar organisations” remain legally ambiguous and dangerously elastic, allowing the government to label any group, farmer unions, student collectives, civil rights groups, as threats to public order. The shift in language is cosmetic and meant to sanitise the Bill’s sweeping repression of dissent. Extremism is of all colours and ideologies including right wing extremism, and therefore this ideological colouring in the Aims and Objectives of the Bill prejudices the intent of tabling of the proposed law itself.

II. Definitions: Vague, overbroad, and open to abuse

Section 2(f): “Unlawful Activity”

The bill defines unlawful activity in terms so vague that it criminalises:

• Speech (“spoken or written”)
• Symbols, gestures, or visual representations
• Activities that merely “tend to interfere” with public order or “generate apprehension”
• Fundraising for such activities

The language allows authorities to criminalise expression, assembly, criticism, satire, and mobilisation, simply by suggesting they pose a potential threat. There is no requirement of actual violence, imminent harm, or intent. The entire section runs counter to the proportionality principles under Articles 19 and 21.

III. Process of Declaring Organisations Unlawful: No real safeguards

Under Sections 3 to 7, the bill empowers the government to:

• Declare an organisation “unlawful” by executive notification;
• Enforce this declaration, in circumstances which according to the State government render it necessary for the Government to declare an organization to be an unlawful organization with immediate effect, before confirmation by the Advisory Board;
• Suppress any facts “in the public interest”;
• Extend the ban year-on-year with no limit on duration.

The Advisory Board that reviews such declarations shall be composed of:

• One retired High Court judge (Chairperson),
• One retired District Judge,
• One Government Pleader.

Notably, the term of the members and Chairperson has not be provided yet. This leaves the possibility open of persons compliant with the government being brought in through the Rules of the proposed law.

This seriously compromises the neutrality and independence of the Board. There is no mechanism for cross-examination, no standards of evidence prescribed, no obligation to publish reasons, and no provision for affected individuals to challenge gag orders or surveillance.

IV. Criminalising association, belief, and participation

Section 8: Section 8 criminalises a wide range of activities related to any organisation declared “unlawful” under the Act. The following acts are punishable with up to 3 years, 5 years, or 7 years of imprisonment, depending on the nature of the alleged involvement:

1. Being a member of an unlawful organisation;
2. Participating in meetings or activities of such organisations;
3. Contributing funds or receiving donations on their behalf;
4. Publishing or circulating material related to them;
5. Promoting their objectives in any manner;
6. Aiding, abetting, encouraging, or inciting support;
7. Possessing property of such organisations.

Penalties escalate based on how “active” the participation is deemed by the state. Even passive association can lead to harsh criminal charges. These clauses mimic UAPA but are applied at a lower legal threshold, enabling pre-emptive criminalisation of ideology and association rather than acts of violence.

V. Powers to Evict, Seize Property, and Forfeit Assets: Extraordinary and disproportionate

Sections 9 and 10:

District Magistrates and Commissioners of Police are empowered to:

• Notify any place as connected to an “unlawful organisation”;
• Evict all occupants from that place; women and children will be given an unspecified “reasonable time” before such eviction
• Seize and forfeit all movable property, money, documents, or personal effects found therein;
• Retain possession of such places for as long as the ban is in effect.

These sections amount to executive-led expropriation with no prior judicial review, offering only token post-facto procedural safeguards.

The provisions are directly lifted from counter-terror laws like UAPA but applied without the threshold of national security or terrorist activity. They can be used against activists, non-profits, and political collectives, without any proof of criminal wrongdoing. As stated above similar provisions that can be used against individuals in a multiplicity of laws, makes both individuals and organisations, protesting or critical of the government in power, vulnerable to harassment through repeated prosecutions and denial of bail.

VI. Financial Forfeiture and Surveillance: Unchecked fiscal repression

Section 11: Forfeiture of funds

• Allows the government to seize any funds it believes with “satisfaction” are used by an unlawful organisation;
• Bypasses judicial warrant in many cases;
• Enables search, seizure, and financial surveillance powers equivalent to tax and terror enforcement regimes.

There is a nominal right to representation, within 15 days, but the final decision lies with the executive, not an independent judicial authority. This absence of judicial oversight and scrutiny further makes the proposed law vulnerable to autocratic misuse by the government of the day.

VII. Curtailment of legal remedies and judicial oversight

Section 12: Allows a revision petition only before the High Court; excluding access to Sessions or District Courts. This violates citizens’ access to justice, especially for the poor and marginalised.

Section 14: Bars any court (except High Court or Supreme Court) from reviewing actions taken under the Act.

These provisions violate the basic structure of judicial review, and the four tier levels of justice adjudication. This also therefore contravenes Articles 14 and 21 by denying due process, effective remedy and fair procedure.

VIII. Investigation and Cognizance: Centralised and politicised

Section 15:

• All offences are cognisable and non-bailable.
• Registration of cases requires written permission from a DIG-level officer, who shall also specify the Investigating Officer who shall investigate the case
• Cognizance by court requires report by an officer not below Additional DGP.

This model makes political clearance mandatory for both arrest and trial, consolidating both administrative and judicial functions in the hands of the police-political bureaucracy. This further concentrates power in the Executive wing of government and militates against the Balance of Powers in the Constitution, further making the proposed law vulnerable to autocratic misuse by the government of the day.

IX. Blanket immunity to state officials

Section 17:

Provides total civil and criminal immunity to the government and any officer acting “in good faith” under the Act.

There is no independent grievance redressal, no liability for false declarations or malicious prosecution, and no institutional oversight. This encourages impunity of those officials who misuse this law against legitimate protest, criticism and dissent.

Conclusion: A constitutional threat in legislative form

The Maharashtra Special Public Safety Bill, 2024 as tabled on July 9, 2025, is not a public safety measure—it is a legalised blueprint for political repression. It merges the worst features of the UAPA, NSA, and AFSPA without the national security context and applies them to civil resistance, democratic expression, and oppositional mobilisation.

Crucial Issue raised this Dissent Note is, is there a need for one more law when UAPA 1967 (amended in 2008, 2019), Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), 2023 and MCOCA, 1999 already give exist in the state and give powers, seen to be unchecked and draconian, to the state and police?

The proposed law, the MSPS Bill 2024, must also be seen in the context of the existence of multiple pre-existing legislation, UAPA 1967 and BNS 2023 that are central laws that have been enacted to “counter terror” and “organised crimes.” These, with MCOCA, 1999, a state law, already provide extensive legal frameworks to address activities deemed as ‘terrorist or secessionist’. These laws grant the state and its police apparatus extraordinary and significant powers to act against individuals engaging in acts that threaten national security, integrity, or sovereignty.

The incorporation of such stringent provisions into Maharashtra’s criminal laws, especially without the necessary safeguards, raises serious concerns about the potential for misuse. Given the current climate of intolerance of any political or creative opposition to government policies, individuals in power etc. and the abuse of power by investigative agencies, this Bill only deepens the risk of arbitrary state action and further threatens fundamental rights.

The MSPS Bill is, in conclusion:

• Unnecessary: Maharashtra already has MCOCA, UAPA, and now BNS provisions to tackle actual terror.
• Unconstitutional: Violates Articles 14, 19, and 21 of the Constitution.
• Anti-democratic: Targets thought, association, mobilisation, and protest.
• Opaque and unaccountable: Hands sweeping powers to the police and executive without checks.

Failure of the Joint Committee to acknowledge opposition and critical voices

The Joint Committee’s report on the Maharashtra Special Public Safety Bill, 2024 (Assembly Bill No. 33) stands exposed as a political whitewash of the serious objections raised during its deliberations. Despite five sittings, the committee’s report fails to acknowledge or incorporate the critical concerns voiced by opposition members, particularly those representing the Maha Vikas Aghadi (MVA).

These members had raised specific and substantive objections relating to:

• The vague and overbroad definitions of unlawful activity;
• The unchecked powers of seizure and arrest;
• The complete bypassing of district courts;
• The lack of independent oversight in the Advisory Board’s composition;
• The broad surveillance and financial seizure powers with no due process.

Despite these being discussed during the committee proceedings, none of them have been reflected in the final version of the Bill as tabled in the Assembly on July 9, 2025. Instead, the government has proceeded with token amendments that do not alter the law’s repressive framework.

Even more concerning is the opaque and exclusionary manner in which the Committee functioned:

• It refused to conduct public hearings, despite having invited written objections from citizens and organisations across Maharashtra;
• It did not grant a single personal hearing to any of the hundreds of individuals and organisations that submitted critiques;
• It did not make public the list of objections received, nor did it transparently document dissenting opinions within the committee.

This process makes it abundantly clear that the Committee was not a site of democratic deliberation, but a procedural formality deployed to blunt public criticism and legitimise an already pre-determined legislative outcome.

The final bill now tabled reflects this closed process: a text riddled with constitutional infirmities, ideological targeting, and structural bias, passed off as a measure for “public safety” while functioning as an instrument of political suppression.

Detailed report on the Joint Committee report may be read here.

The bill may be read below.

The dissent not in Marathi may be read below:

Related:

Maharashtra Unites: State-wide protests to take place against controversial MSPS Bill on April 22

Understanding the Maharashtra Special Public Security (MSPS) Bill, 2024 | Threat to Civil Liberties?

CJP sends objections against Maharashtra Special Public Security Bill, 2024, citing grave threats to civil liberties

Press Release: Experts warn, Maharashtra Special Public Security Bill a threat to civil liberties

Maharashtra Special Public Security Bill: Bogey of “urban naxals” invoked to legitimise clamping down of dissent?

The post Dissent Note: Maharashtra Special Public Safety Bill, 2024 appeared first on SabrangIndia.

Naim was Professor Emeritus of South Asian Languages and Civilisations at the University of Chicago – a position which capped his decade-long association with the university where he taught from 1961 to 2001. He chaired the South Asian Languages and Civilisations department from 1985 to 1991.

A founding editor of many journals and prolific commentator, his voice resonated on all matters to do with Urdu language, culture and its politics as things got dire for Urdu in the sub-continent, the place of its birth.

He has been Consultant to the Asian Literature Program of the Asia Society, New York City, Princeton University Press, University of Chicago Press, University of California Press, Feminist Press, Shastri Indo-Canadian Institute and the National Endowment for the Humanities. He had also served as Member, South Asia Regional Council, Association for Asian Studies, 1976-79, of the Committee on Scholars of Asian Descent, Association for Asian Studies, 1981-84, then South Asia Regional Council, Association for Asian Studies, 1990-93. He has been on the Advisory Committee, Berkeley Urdu Language Program in Pakistan, University of California, Berkeley, as well as Member, Board of Trustees, America-Pakistan Research Organization, 1989-93 and also Member, Board of Trustees, American Institute of Pakistan Studies, 1993-95.

Naim unhesitatingly tackled political issues along with his serious work on pure literary debates. In 1989, after a visit to Palestine, he wrote powerful words on what he saw, words that are especially relevant today.

One of his more recent works, an example of his enduring connection to all that was Urdu, was Urdu Crime Fiction, 1890–1950: An Informal History  which came out in 2023.

How did Naim feel on his first day in the United States? His observations were recalled as friends and colleagues remembered his contributions and tributes poured in.

For The Wire, Naim wrote sadly on how there is now no major Urdu newspaper or magazine that is edited by a non-Muslim and how in the past 75 years, the culture of Urdu magazines read by families of all faiths has disappeared. In another piece full of characteristic edge, Naim gently chastised  brands for never using the letter ‘j’ while transliterating Urdu words.

Courtesy: The Wire

The post One of Urdu’s Greatest Scholars, C.M. Naim, Passes Away appeared first on SabrangIndia.

The petitioners contend that the ECI’s decision to conduct the SIR is arbitrary, lacks proper justification, and infringes upon fundamental rights guaranteed by Articles 14, 19, and 21 of the Constitution. A key aspect the Court will examine is whether the SIR process violates principles of due process and natural justice, particularly concerning potential voter deletions. Furthermore, the petitioners have questioned the practicality and reasonableness of the timeline set for the SIR.

This issue is not merely a legal one; it has become a focal point of concern among opposition political parties and civil rights activists. The timing of the SIR, just months before the Bihar Assembly Elections, has raised questions. In January 2025, the final electoral rolls for the state Vidhan Sabha (VS) elections had been finalised. The SIR has, moreover been analysed by many including Sabrangindia to be a sinister move since the constitutional body appears to be “Usurping the powers to test ‘Indian citizenship’, powers that do not lie with the ECI, the latest move by CEC Gyanesh Kumar is not just unlawful and hasty but violative of the Indian Constitution and the Representation of Peoples Act, 1950 and the Registration of Electors Rules, 1960.”

Political commentators and civil rights activists have also viewed it as a potential strategy to disenfranchise a substantial number of voters, especially those from marginalised communities. The apprehension is that if these voters cannot produce specific documents alongside the enumeration forms, they could be unjustly removed from the electoral rolls, effectively shifting the burden of inclusion onto the most vulnerable and transforming a fundamental right into a document-centric ordeal. The eleven listed documents are inaccessible to many small farmers, landless labourers, migrant worker communities and women. The documents requested for this revision are largely not proofs of Indian citizenship, and with the exception of a birth certificate, none verify the date or place of birth in India.

The ECI move –politically guided and driven –appears clearly to be motivated by a clear desire to disenfranchise the unlettered voter who “owns no property.” Worse, after the “announcement” to the effect that “all electors must submit an enumeration form, and those registered after 2003 have to additionally provide documentation establishing their citizenship violates not just the Constitution but Clause 15 and 19 of the Representation of People’s Act, 1950!

Special Intensive Revision (SIR) in Bihar

On June 24, 2025, the ECI formally announced the initiation of a Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls across all assembly constituencies in Bihar. The ECI has framed this intensified exercise as crucial for maintaining the integrity of the democratic process and ensuring free and fair elections. While the Commission has stated its intent to eventually roll out SIR nationwide as a constitutional mandate, Bihar has been prioritised due to the upcoming legislative assembly elections later in 2025. The SIR for other states is expected to be announced subsequently.

The ECI has cited a combination of demographic and administrative factors to justify this comprehensive revision. These include rapid urbanisation, frequent migration patterns, the continuous addition of newly eligible young voters, the underreporting of deaths, and, significantly, the need to address the potential inclusion of foreign illegal immigrants on voter lists. The explicitly stated objectives of the SIR are threefold: to ensure every eligible citizen is enrolled without exclusion, to purge the rolls of any ineligible voters, and to systematically remove names of individuals who are deceased, have permanently shifted their residence, or are otherwise absent.

Implementation and initial stringent documentary requirements

To implement this revision, the ECI established a clear procedural framework. The electoral roll from 2003, with a qualifying date of January 1, 2003, was designated as the foundational or “probative” evidence of eligibility. Electoral Registration Officers (EROs) were directed to presume the citizenship of individuals on this roll unless contradictory information emerged. However, the SIR introduced new and notably stringent requirements for those not listed on the 2003 roll or for younger voters. Opposition parties have demanded that the Electoral Rolls used for the Lok Sabha polls of 2024 should be the base rolls used for the revision.

Initially, any person whose name did not appear on the 2003 Electoral Roll was required to submit proof of eligibility from a prescribed list of government-issued documents. The process was even more rigorous for citizens born after 1987. For instance, an individual born between July 1, 1987, and December 2, 2004, had to furnish an approved document for themselves and a separate document for either their father or mother to establish their date and/or place of birth. For anyone born after December 2, 2004, the requirement was stricter still: they had to provide their own documentation in addition to documents for both their father and mother. If one parent was not an Indian citizen, a copy of their passport and visa from the time of the elector’s birth was to be submitted.

Crucially, the Aadhaar card, Ration Card and the Elector’s Photo Identity Card (EPIC) were conspicuously absent from the list of eleven acceptable proofs. The validated documents included passports, birth certificates, matriculation certificates, permanent residence certificates, SC/ST/OBC certificates, and various other official documents issued by government authorities, banks, or PSUs prior to July 1, 1987, such as identity cards, pension orders, land allotment certificates, or entries in the National Register of Citizens (though not applicable to Bihar).

This initial stringent requirement raised concerns about potential discrimination. While individuals in certain societal positions (e.g., government servants, landholders) might more easily produce documents, others, particularly those born in the 1970s and 1980s for whom birth certificates are often scarce, were left heavily reliant on this single, often unavailable, document.

Furthermore, the provision exempting those on the 2003 voter list from producing documents was criticised as discriminatory, as it bypassed the very verification process being applied to others.

Backtracking from initial stringent conditions: ECI drops parental birth document requirement

Responding to the formidable backlash that ensued, the ECI announced substantial relaxations to its controversial SIR requirements in Bihar on June 30, 2025. This effectively reversed its initial stringent demand for parental birth documents. The backtrack came in direct response to intense criticism from opposition parties and civil society, who had vehemently protested the original June 24 directive as an impractical disenfranchisement risk and a covert attempt to introduce a National Register of Citizens (NRC).

Under the revised guidelines, the ECI now leverages the 2003 Bihar electoral roll, which contains 4.96 crore electors, as a primary verification tool. Individuals born after 1987 are no longer required to provide their parents’ birth documentation if either their own name or their parents’ names appear on this 2003 list. This change is projected to streamline the process for approximately 60% of the state’s electorate, who can now simply verify their details against the 2003 data and submit an enumeration form. Even if an elector’s name is absent from the 2003 roll, they can use an extract from it to substantiate their parents’ details without needing further corroborating documents, although they must still provide their own proof of eligibility.

This move, a clear afterthought is however likely to adversely impact vast sections of Bihar’s youth that reel under an absence of access and documentation.

While rolling back the contentious measures, the ECI defended the underlying principle of the SIR, framing it as a fundamental statutory exercise mandated by the Representation of the People Act, 1950, and a routine part of maintaining accurate electoral rolls for over 75 years. To facilitate this revised process, the Commission has directed that the 2003 rolls be made widely available to Booth Level Officers in hard copy and accessible to the public for download on its website.

Bihar: the most document scarce state in the country

Reliable studies consistently show Bihar to be among the most “document scarce” states in India, a critical factor that amplifies the challenges of the ECI’s voter verification drive and its “proof of citizenship” demands. An analysis of the 11 documents initially suggested as proof reveals significant limitations in their widespread availability.

For instance, identity or pension cards from government undertakings or PSUs are an option, yet data from the 2022 caste census indicate that less than 2% of voting-age Biharis hold government jobs, rendering this proof largely inaccessible for the majority. Birth certificates are another problematic requirement; the National Family Health Survey-3 (NFHS-3) shows only 2.8% of Bihar’s population born between 2001 and 2005 possess them, with the percentage likely even lower for older generations. Similarly, only about 2.4% of Biharis possess passports.

Latest 2022 statistics by the Civil Registration System (CRS) 2022[1] show that Bihar is among 14 states like Tripura, Assam, Telangana, West Bengal, Kerala, Jharkhand, Ladakh, Uttar Pradesh, Karnataka, Rajasthan, Meghalaya, Delhi and Jammu & Kashmir that are in the “the category of more than 50 percent to less than of registration of births” (Statement 12, page 38 of the documenyt) This government document shows that Bihar has 61.2 % (Registered Births in Rural Bihar, 2022) 38.8 % (Registered Birth in Urban Bihar) (Statement 18, Page 47).

While matriculation certificates are more common, with the National Family Health Survey-2 (NFHS-2) and NFHS-5 revealing that approximately 45-50% of 18–40-year-olds are matriculates, a substantial gender gap persists. Forest rights certificates, while an option, are relevant to a minuscule segment of the population, given that Scheduled Tribes constitute just 1.3% of Bihar’s populace, and only a fraction of those actually reside in forest areas. Caste certificates (OBC, SC, or ST), according to the India Human Development Survey-2 (2011-12), were possessed by about 16% of Biharis, roughly one in four households in these categories; upper castes, by definition, would not hold such certificates. Furthermore, the presence in an NRC or family register, both listed as proofs, is not applicable to Bihar. Lastly, government-issued land/house allotment certificates are suggested, but these are not provided for beneficiaries of schemes like the PM Awas Yojana, leaving ambiguity about who receives such documents and their overall coverage. These data, highlighted in The Hindu on July 1, 2025.

The emerging concern: from voter to doubtful/disputed voter – a looming fear

A series of electoral and administrative procedures creates a perilous journey for individuals whose citizenship comes under scrutiny—an exercise that has to be performed under due process by the state and not the ECI–potentially transforming a routine voter verification into a path towards disenfranchisement and the daunting status of a “suspected foreigner.” This process, ostensibly aimed at ensuring the integrity of electoral rolls, is fraught with measures that can lead to severe and life-altering consequences for those unable to meet documentation requirements. The situation unfolds in a connected sequence of events, each escalating the potential for an individual to lose their right to vote and, ultimately, their claim to citizenship.

The initial point of concern arises from the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls. While being on the electoral roll is not a definitive guarantee of citizenship, the SIR process itself subjects existing electors to rigorous scrutiny. The true fear for individuals begins with a specific guideline within the Election Commission’s order dated June 24, 2025. Para 5(b) of these guidelines empowers Electoral Registration Officers (EROs) with a critical and twofold authority: if an elector fails to produce documents that satisfy the ERO, the officer can not only delete their name from the voter list but is also mandated to report that individual to the “competent authority” as a “suspected foreigner.” This single provision creates a high-stakes scenario where the inability to provide the required, and often ambiguously defined, documentation can instantly escalate a person’s status from a voter to a suspected foreigner, a direction criticised as draconian and arbitrary.

Once a person is flagged as having “doubtful/disputed” citizenship, a significant and immediate consequence is the suspension of their voting rights. The process dictates that individuals whose names are entered provisionally in the electoral rolls, marked with the letter ‘D’ to signify their doubtful status, are debarred from casting their vote. This prohibition is not temporary; it may extend to all future general elections to the Lok Sabha and any State Legislative Assembly elections. The individual remains in this state of civic limbo, stripped of a fundamental right while their case navigates a complex legal system.

The question that is being raised is, is the citizenship of thousands of Indians being tested in this rather surreptitious way?

Post-SIR: what can be next for voters who become doubtful/disputed voters?

The pattern that seems to be emerging from the politically-directed ECI’s move is that the union government wishes to use elections to introduce an Assam-like situation in the state without any legislative backing.  Due to the peculiar situation in that state post-Independence and that which emerged before and after the Assam Accord, two laws, the Foreigners Act of 1946 (now repealed by the Foreigners Act 2025) and the now repealed Illegal Migration Determination of Tribunals Act, 1983. In Assam, following an ECI Order of 1998 and directions before that hundreds of thousands of voters were declared ‘D’ Voters (doubtful voters) with their status to be adjudicated by Foreigner Tribunals (FTs) in the state. Twenty seven years later there remain approximately 1.2 lakh such disenfranchised citizens who have not been able to cast their vote. In Assam, laws mandated the formation of the FTs that have been since strongly critiqued for not functioning with a clear constitutional framework that follows the Indian law of evidence; in Bihar and the rest of India where the ECI has threatened to bring in the expanded SIR, there exists no law that mandates the formation of such Tribunals.

Under the prevalent practice in Assam –the ultimate decision concerning the “doubtful/disputed” persons in electoral roll lies with the Election Commission of India (ECI). When the commission is not satisfied and has reasonable doubt about the citizenship of any person, it can refer all such cases to the competent authority, which has been mandated to be the tribunal under the Foreigners Act, 1946.

A person whose citizenship status is in question and under consideration before a Foreigners Tribunal is not eligible to vote unless the Tribunal decides in their favour that they are a citizen of India. As mentioned above, if this adjudication process is mired in bureaucratic delay, the constitutional right to vote is denied. This is because individuals whose citizenship status is doubtful or disputed, as indicated by a ‘D’ against their names in the electoral rolls, shall be barred from casting their vote in any ensuing general election. This restriction will persist until an appropriate Tribunal determines their citizenship status in their favour. The looming threat of an adverse tribunal decision, leading to an official declaration as a foreigner, brings with it the profound fear of potential detention and the complete forfeiture of all rights and the sense of belonging in their country. To repeat there exists no legislative framework for this exercise and the manner in which it is being conducted under executive diktat presently.

The constitutional and statutory bedrock

The entire electoral revision process is firmly anchored in India’s constitutional and legal framework governing elections. The foundational provisions for these regulations are Articles 326 and 327 of the Constitution. Article 326 establishes the principle of adult suffrage, stating that elections shall be held on the basis that every citizen of India, aged at least eighteen, is entitled to be registered as a voter, provided they are not otherwise disqualified by law. This article makes Indian citizenship a non-negotiable prerequisite for voting rights. Article 327 further empowers Parliament to enact laws concerning all election-related matters, including the preparation of electoral rolls. However, this power is explicitly “subject to the provisions of the Constitution,” meaning any law passed by Parliament must align with the principles outlined in Article 326.

Acting under this constitutional authority, Parliament enacted the Representation of the People’s Act, 1950 (for registration) and the Representation of the People’s Act, 1951 (for the conduct of elections). Section 16 of the 1950 Act details the “disqualifications for registration,” prominently stating that a person who is not a citizen of India is disqualified. In conjunction, Section 62 of the 1951 Act outlines the “right to vote.” While sub-section (1) of Section 62 entitles a person entered on the electoral roll to vote, sub-section (2) acts as a crucial check, stating that no person shall vote if they are subject to any disqualification mentioned in Section 16 of the 1950 Act. This unequivocally clarifies that even if a non-citizen’s name is erroneously present on a voter list, they possess no legal right to cast a ballot. The inquiry into these qualifications is conducted during the preparation and revision of electoral rolls, and if a person is found disqualified, their name can be struck off, and they are barred from voting.

ECI deploys BLOs for house-to-house voter verification

In Bihar, the ECI has deployed thousands of Booth Level Officers (BLOs) to conduct a comprehensive house-to-house voter verification drive. As per instructions, BLOs will conduct door-to-door surveys, distributing and collecting pre-filled enumeration forms along with supporting documents from existing electors. These forms are also downloadable from the ECI website or can be filled and uploaded online. For transparency and privacy, verification documents will be uploaded to ECINET, a secure platform accessible only to authorised election officials.

The ECI has also urged active participation from political parties, requesting them to appoint Booth Level Agents (BLAs) to help resolve discrepancies early in the process. Claims and objections raised by electors or political parties will be assessed by Assistant Electoral Registration Officers (AEROs). The final electoral roll will be published by Electoral Registration Officers (EROs) after all claims and objections have been resolved. These draft final rolls are slated for publication on August 1, 2025, and will be made publicly accessible on the ECI and Chief Electoral Officer websites, in addition to being shared with recognised political parties.

Plenary powers of the Election Commission

Article 324 of the Constitution serves as a foundational provision, entrusting the ECI with comprehensive responsibility for conducting both national and state elections. This includes the essential powers required to fulfill that duty effectively. Specifically, Article 324 grants the ECI plenary powers of superintendence, direction, and control over the preparation of electoral rolls and the conduct of elections for Parliament and every State Legislature. These powers are particularly crucial in areas where specific legislation is absent. Sections 21 and 22 of the Representation of the People Act, 1950 (RP Act, 1950), explicitly acknowledge the Commission’s authority to issue general or special directions concerning the preparation and correction of electoral rolls.

It’s important to note that the Supreme Court, in Mohinder Singh Gill vs. Chief Election Comr. (1978) 1 SCC 405, clarified the limits of this broad authority. The Court ruled that while the ECI can issue instructions and orders in areas not covered by legislation, this power must not be exercised in a malicious, arbitrary, or biased manner, nor without due consideration.

SIR Status till July 8

As of June 24, 2025, Bihar’s electoral roll comprised approximately 7.90 crore electors (7,89,69,844). The ECI has reported significant progress in the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) exercise. By July 5, 2025, at 6:00 PM, 1.04 crore Enumeration Forms (13.19% of total electors) had been submitted, with 93.57% of forms distributed. This momentum continued, with 1.69 crore forms (21.46%) received by July 6, 2025, 6:00 PM, including 65.33 lakh collected in the preceding 24 hours. As of July 7, 2025, 6:00 PM, submissions surged to 2.88 crore forms (36.47% of total electors), with 1.18 crore collected in the last 24 hours. The ECI anticipates completing the collection of Enumeration Forms well before the July 25, 2025 deadline, having already received 3.71 crore forms (46.95% of total electors) by 6:00 PM on July 8, just 14 days after the SIR instructions were issued.

It is likely, if the Supreme Court understands the wider and problematic implications of the present exercise, that the petitions will be extensively heard and argued. The people of India will await with concern their outcome.

Related

Bihar: Sinister move by ECI as ‘intensive’ revision of electoral roles set to exclude vast majority of legitimate voters

Bihar 2025 Election: EC drops parental birth document requirement for 4.96 crore electors and their children in Bihar

The Erased Record: A constitutional challenge to the election commission’s 45-day data destruction mandate

[1] VITAL STATISTICS OF INDIA BASED ON THE CIVIL REGISTRATION SYSTEM 2022 brought out by the OFFICE OF THE REGISTRAR GENERAL, INDIA MINISTRY OF HOME AFFAIRS VITAL STATISTICS DIVISION CIVIL REGISTRATION SYSTEM SECTION

The post SC: ECI’s ‘wisdom’ on revision of electoral rolls challenged, does a disenfranchisement crisis loom over Bihar, with thousands being declared ‘‘D’ (doubtful) voters? appeared first on SabrangIndia.

“We are verifying their proof of Indian citizenship and other details like how they came to Odisha,” Parmar stated, as per the report of The Hindu.

The individuals detained are primarily engaged in construction, mining, and industrial labour, and have been residing in various parts of western Odisha. Police sources admit that many of these workers are long-time residents, while others have migrated recently for work, according to The New Indian Express.

MHA-led crackdown, coastal surveillance, and STF deployment

Citing an internal MHA directive, state authorities have activated STFs in all districts — each headed by the respective Superintendent of Police and assisted by a Foreigners Registration Officer (FRO). Their mandate is unambiguous: detect, identify, and deport any individual who fails to furnish documentation proving Indian citizenship.

The Odisha government has gone further by identifying a disused jail in Athagarh as a state-level holding centre. Districts have also been instructed to locate additional temporary holding centres for those detained pending verification.

This sweeping action aligns with the priorities of the newly elected BJP government in Odisha, led by Chief Minister Mohan Charan Majhi, who has made the “removal of illegal immigrants” a central plank of his administration. During a recent visit to Kendrapada, Majhi ordered district officials to coordinate with central intelligence agencies and “take strict legal action” against undocumented Bangladeshi nationals, calling the move essential for “national security”, as reported by The New Indian Express.

Odisha’s 480-km coastline is frequently cited by state authorities as a vulnerability point for unauthorized maritime entry, especially into coastal districts such as Kendrapada, Jagatsinghpur, Bhadrak, and Balasore. Officials allege that many undocumented persons arrive via the sea route and gradually disperse inland for employment.

West Bengal Slams Odisha for “Barbaric Attitude” Towards Migrants

The detentions have triggered sharp political reactions from West Bengal, where many of the detained workers hail from. A significant number reportedly belong to districts such as Murshidabad, Nadia, Malda, Birbhum, Purba Bardhaman, and South 24 Parganas.

Samirul Islam, Trinamool Congress MP and migrant rights advocate, publicly accused the Odisha BJP government of engaging in linguistic and ethnic profiling: “Once again, atrocities against Bengali-speaking migrant workers continue in Odisha’s Jharsuguda district. The BJP-ruled Odisha government recently detained over 200 migrant workers from various districts of Bengal — including Murshidabad, Birbhum,Malda, Nadia, Purba Burdwan, and South 24 Parganas — on suspicion of being Bangladeshi nationals. This is a fresh round of detentions by the BJP-ruled Odisha government, following the earlier confinement of hundreds of migrant workers from Bengal. What is their fault? That they speak Bengali? What grudge do @narendramodi and @AmitShah hold against these poor Bengalis? Despite our repeated appeals, the top BJP leadership seems least bothered to address the plight of these Bengali-speaking individuals. Will they at least consult with @Odisha_CMO to understand their situation? We have already moved the court. If this barbaric attitude continues, we will launch a larger movement against such practices. Our Chief Secretary has also written to Chief Secretary Odisha regarding the plight of the Bengali speaking migrant population Our Chief Minister, @MamataOfficial, has already made it clear: Bengal will not tolerate any move that causes suffering to our people working in other states.”

Once again, atrocities against Bengali-speaking migrant workers continue in Odisha’s Jharsuguda district.
The BJP-ruled Odisha government recently detained over 200 migrant workers from various districts of Bengal — including Murshidabad, Birbhum,Malda, Nadia, Purba Burdwan, and… pic.twitter.com/FL2WN2CsS2

— Samirul Islam (@SamirulAITC) July 9, 2025

He confirmed that West Bengal’s Chief Secretary has written to his Odisha counterpart, seeking clarity and intervention. Islam also warned of legal and mass mobilization if detentions continue without justification.

Echoing the outrage, senior TMC MP Mahua Moitra wrote: “23 workers from Nadia being held in illegal detention in Jharsuguda. I urge @SecyChief @DGPOdisha to release immediately. Never happened in 24 years of @Naveen_Odisha & now it is daily occurrence.”

23 workers from Nadia being held in illegal detention in Jharsuguda. I urge @SecyChief @DGPOdisha to release immediately. Never happened in 24 years of @Naveen_Odisha & now it is daily occurrence. Do not think there is no-one to fight for these workers. pic.twitter.com/n4WMBFQlB6

— Mahua Moitra (@MahuaMoitra) July 9, 2025

In another tweet, Moitra cited a clearance report from the Krishnanagar Police Department confirming the Indian identity of many of those detained, and appealed for their immediate release: “@himanshulalips verification report of all persons given by @KrishnanagarPD. Full check completed. Please release asap. Delay is denial.”

‘ @himanshulalips verification report of all persons given by @KrishnanagarPD. Full check completed. Please release asap. Delay is denial. @SecyChief @DGPOdisha pic.twitter.com/5OuXUEw9Jw

— Mahua Moitra (@MahuaMoitra) July 9, 2025

Paradip detention of a reportedly Bangladeshi family raises coastal security questions

Separately, four individuals from a single family, reportedly Bangladeshi nationals, were detained by Paradip Police in Jagatsinghpur district on July 8. Identified as Kirati Sardar (40), his wife Simili (38), daughter Jaya (19) and son Jay (17), the family allegedly arrived by sea from Khulna, Bangladesh, in May and entered West Bengal via Babughat. After a brief stay in Piali, they travelled to Paradip in search of work.

Paradip police, led by IIC Rasmiranjan Das, detained them from the home of a local resident following a tip-off. Officials confirmed that the family lacked Aadhaar or any Indian identity documentation, and they are now slated for deportation via the Border Security Force (BSF), pending district-level approval.

Local resident Kamla Gayana, as reported by The New Indian Express, who had sheltered the family, told reporters: “They said they were living under miserable conditions in Bangladesh and preferred death over deportation.”

The case has intensified scrutiny over coastal surveillance systems. Despite Odisha’s repeated assurances about enhanced naval, Coast Guard, marine police, and fisheries department patrols, such sea entries continue, prompting questions about enforcement gaps.

The numbers and the silence

While an official March 2025 Assembly reply pegged the number of undocumented Bangladeshi migrants in Odisha at 3,740, senior officials admit the actual figure is likely far higher. However, questions need to be raised regarding the criteria and process being used to declare people as “illegal”, especially when detentions overwhelmingly affect poor, Bengali-speaking labourers. Critics argue that linguistic profiling, rather than concrete evidence, is being used as a blunt tool for mass detentions and potential deportations.

What remains deeply concerning is the complete absence of legal representation, independent verification, or human rights oversight in these processes. Most detainees are held without access to legal aid, family contact, or due process.

Conclusion: Law enforcement or linguistic witch-hunt?

As the Jharsuguda crackdown widens and detentions continue across coastal districts like Paradip, Odisha’s BJP government faces growing accusations of turning the question of undocumented immigration into a communal and ethnic flashpoint.

While the state cites MHA directives and “national security” to justify its actions, the lack of procedural safeguards, combined with overwhelming political targeting of Bengali-speaking migrants, threatens to escalate into a full-blown constitutional crisis, one that pits federalism and fundamental rights against a rising tide of xenophobic enforcement.

The Odisha government now faces a choice: transparent verification rooted in law or a descent into detention-driven populism.

Related:

Bordering on illegality? 18 alleged Bangladeshis “pushed back” without due process, Legal challenge filed in High Court

other Pushback Halted: SC stays deportation of woman declared foreigner, issues notice on challenge to Gauhati HC order

After incorrect detention claim, Gauhati HC was informed that Doyjan Bibi was handed over to BSF

“Bail once granted can’t be ignored”: Gauhati HC seeks legal basis for re-detentions of COVID-era released detainees

The post Bengali-Speaking Migrants Detained En Masse in Odisha: National security or targeted persecution? appeared first on SabrangIndia.

By the end of April 2025, the total number of farmer suicides had risen to 869, according to divisional-level reports from the relief and rehabilitation department, report Scroll. Amravati division topped the list with 327 deaths, followed by Marathwada with 269, Nagpur with 135, Nashik with 106, and Pune division with 32.

Marathwada, historically one of India’s most drought-prone and underserved regions, is reeling under an escalating crisis. From just January to March 2025, 269 suicides were reported in its eight districts- Beed (71), Chhatrapati Sambhajinagar (50), Nanded (37), Parbhani (33), Dharashiv (31), Latur (18), Hingoli (16), and Jalna (13). This marked a steep rise from 204 suicides during the same period in 2024 (TOI, April 2025).

These are not just numbers, they are lost lives, shattered families, and communities pushed beyond endurance. Yet, Maharashtra’s response has been chillingly procedural: of the 767 suicide cases reported between January and March, just 373 were deemed “eligible” for compensation. The families of only 327 farmers received the state’s standard ex gratia of ₹1 lakh. The remaining 200 cases were rejected. The fate of 194 others remains suspended in bureaucratic inquiry limbo, according to a report in the PTI.

A vicious spiral of loss

Each suicide is a family shattered. Families like that of 43-year-old Kailash Arjun Nagare in Buldhana, once honoured with the Maharashtra government’s Young Farmer Award, who died by suicide on Holi by consuming poison in his field, as reported by PTI in March 2025. His suicide note blamed the acute water crisis and government apathy. Nagare had recently led a five-day hunger strike demanding irrigation water for 14 villages from the Khadakpurna reservoir. His body was not allowed to be moved for hours as protesting farmers demanded accountability. “This is not a suicide; it is state-sanctioned murder,” said farmer leader Ravikant Tupkar, according to the Indian Express report.

Or take the case of Sonia Uikey, a 17-year-old from Wardha, who hanged herself on July 4, 2025 because her family couldn’t afford her Class 12 school fees. “We’ve moved from farmers killing themselves to their children ending their lives too,” said NCP (SP) MP Amar Kale after visiting her home, as reported by PTI.

The math of misery

At the heart of the crisis lies an economic model stacked against the farmer. As veteran farmer activist Vijay Jawandhiya explained to Rediff, the government celebrates low inflation, 3.5% as per the RBI, while ignoring the price farmers have paid for it. “Inflation fell because vegetable and crop prices collapsed, not because life became cheaper for farmers,” he said while speaking with Rediff. While input costs like fertiliser, health, and education remained high, prices for crops plummeted due to imports and policy neglect. Soya bean was sold at ₹4,000 per quintal against an MSP of ₹4,892. Cotton fetched ₹7,000 against an MSP of ₹7,500. Tur dal prices dropped disastrously from ₹12,000 to ₹6,000 per quintal.

“Farmers are losing money on every harvest,” said food policy expert Devinder Sharma, according to a report of The Hindu. “It’s not that agriculture is unproductive, it’s that we have made it unviable.” He cited the NSSO’s most recent Situation Assessment Survey, which found that average monthly income from farming stands at just ₹10,218. This boils down to a daily income of ₹27 from agriculture alone, barely enough to buy a meal, let alone repay debts, as reported by The Hindu.

Government Aid: A leaky pipe

Out of the 767 suicides recorded between January and March 2025, only 373 cases were deemed eligible for compensation; 200 were rejected, and 194 were still under inquiry, according to Indian Express. Of the eligible cases, just 327 families received the ₹1 lakh financial aid promised under government policy.

Worse, large sections of vulnerable farmers are excluded from this count altogether. “Women farmers, Dalits, Adivasis, and tenant cultivators are systematically excluded,” says journalist P. Sainath, as per The Hindu. “If a deceased farmer doesn’t have a 7/12 land deed, their death is simply not counted.” After 2014, changes in suicide data methodology, like classifying tenant farmers as agricultural labourers, further diluted the real scale of the crisis, according to People’s Archive of Rural India.

Seeds of Exploitation: The HTBT cotton crisis

Even Maharashtra’s cotton sector is now undermined by an unregulated seed market. Speaking to The Hindu, Jawandhia warned that nearly 1 crore of the 2 crore cotton seed packets in use this year are unauthorized F2 (second-generation) seeds. These genetically inferior, unofficial hybrids are being sold for ₹2,000/kg despite production costs of just ₹40/kg, creating a grey market that exploits desperate farmers. He urged the government to introduce pureline cotton varieties, allowing farmers to replant without buying from private firms every season.

Uneven burdens across regions

The reasons suicides are higher in Vidarbha and Marathwada, compared to Konkan or western Maharashtra, lie in systemic neglect. Vidarbha’s agriculture is largely rain-fed and high-risk. Landholdings have shrunk drastically, families now farm barely five acres each. In contrast, western Maharashtra enjoys access to horticulture, subsidies, and better irrigation. Konkan’s rural economy is cushioned by remittances from Mumbai (Rediff, July 2025).

The state government continues to announce schemes like the ₹1,500 per month Laadki Bahin Yojana for women and ₹6,000 PM-Kisan aid. But when compared to the ₹45,000 monthly salary a peon is expected to draw under the 8th Pay Commission, these figures seem paltry. “There are two Indias,” Jawandhia says. “A peon in the government earns ₹45,000 per month, while a farmer gets ₹1,500 under Laadki Bahin Yojana. What’s ₹1,500 for a woman managing an entire farm household?”

Forgotten families, drowning in debt

The effects ripple across generations. In Pali, Beed, Meena Dhere works in onion fields for ₹250 a day while her elderly mother-in-law watches over her children. Her husband Ashok died by suicide in January 2025 after accumulating a ₹3 lakh debt. In Chhatrapati Sambhajinagar, 45-year-old Sadhana Kalaskar lives under a tin roof, trying to pay off a ₹6 lakh wedding loan after her husband’s suicide in November 2024, as reported by The Hindu.

“Government policies speak of relief, but the ground reality is abandonment,” said social worker Nitnaware. “After a suicide, the family is left with not just grief but also loans, unpaid school fees, and hungry mouths.”

A Political Hotbed, But No Long-Term Solutions

Farmer suicides became a central issue during the 2024–25 election cycle. PM Modi promised MSP of ₹6,000 per quintal for soya bean, while Congress’s Rahul Gandhi vowed ₹7,000. But beyond these headlines, little changed. On July 3, opposition parties staged a walkout in the Maharashtra assembly, accusing the state of ignoring the non-payment crisis for soybean farmers, as reported by PTI.

Rahul Gandhi’s reaction to the suicide figures summed up public frustration: “767 families shattered in three months. Is this just a statistic? Or a stain on our collective conscience?”

सोचिए.. सिर्फ 3 महीनों में महाराष्ट्र में 767 किसानों ने आत्महत्या कर ली।

क्या ये सिर्फ एक आंकड़ा है? नहीं। ये 767 उजड़े हुए घर हैं। 767 परिवार जो कभी नहीं संभल पाएंगे।

और सरकार? चुप है। बेरुख़ी से देख रही है।

किसान हर दिन कर्ज़ में और गहराई तक डूब रहा है – बीज महंगे हैं, खाद… pic.twitter.com/uDzFpYoMrG

— Rahul Gandhi (@RahulGandhi) July 3, 2025

A death every few hours

Farmer rights groups like Kisan Putra Andolan estimate that Maharashtra now loses 7–8 farmers every single day. These are not mere economic failures—they are policy murders, born of wilful neglect, rising input costs, collapsed MSPs, and mounting debt. In over two decades, Maharashtra has recorded 39,825 farmer suicides. Of these, 22,193 were confirmed to be due to agrarian distress. The government has paid ₹220 crore as compensation, an average of just ₹55,000 per suicide.

The numbers are terrifying, but they only tell part of the story. Behind each death is a voice that went unheard, a protest ignored, a loan unpaid, a dream deferred. Maharashtra’s farmer crisis is not seasonal, it is structural. Until that is acknowledged, the state will continue to bury its farmers and their futures, one suicide at a time.

Related:

As 30 crore workers, farmers join July 9 strike against govt.’s policies, will there be media coverage of the shut down?

TN: Sugarcane Farmers Protest, Demand Better FRP, Reintroduction of SAP

Farmers’ leader detained forcefully on Constitution Day as protests for delivering guarantee on legal MSP intensify

The post A Silent Emergency: Farmer suicides surge in Maharashtra amid apathy, debt, and systemic collapse appeared first on SabrangIndia.

The government said in newspaper advertisements in favour of privatization that this will provide customers with quality of service, efficiency, rural income, agricultural productivity, immediate resolution of complaints, reliability, digital service, industrial development in rural areas and 24 hours 7 days electricity service. Regarding these claims, electricity employees say that as far as digital service etc. are concerned, facilities like fault registration, 1912 call center, Vidyut mobile consumer app etc. are still in place. Privatization will cause great harm to rural income and agricultural productivity. The facilities that farmers are getting today like subsidy or free electricity for irrigation and separate rural feeders and agricultural feeders for cheap electricity, all this will end. Consumers will be forced to buy very expensive electricity. Even before privatization, the government has proposed to increase the price of electricity, so that the companies can make immense profits after privatization. As far as line loss is concerned, the employees have said with figures that line loss in the private sector is more than in the government sector. Electricity employees also say that the truth of the talk of privatization based on losses is that at present the total loss of the Power Corporation is 1 lakh 18000 crores, while the outstanding as per 2023-24 is 1 lakh 15000 crores. In this too, the biggest outstanding is of government departments and big businessmen, whose recovery will reduce the deficit. Also, the subsidy money that the government is giving right now under its constitutional obligations has also been included in the loss, which is absolutely wrong.

It is a matter of quality, efficiency, responsibility and reliability of service by the private sector. In this context, the recent plane crash in Ahmedabad is a living example of this. Where such a terrible destruction happened after Air India, run by the Government of India, was handed over to the Tata Group. Ambani’s Jio mobile network is also an example for the advocates of privatization. It was expanded by ruining the government BSNL. This company, which started its business by giving free network, is today fixing arbitrary tariffs. Now, despite the threat to the security of the country, Jio and Bharti Group’s Airtel have signed an agreement with American capitalist Elon Musk’s company Starlink.

Actually, the BJP-RSS government is helping a few capital houses to loot the country’s natural resources, public property, economic sources and labour force. Modi and Yogi’s government is also engaged in handing over the electricity department of Uttar Pradesh to a few capital houses of Gujarat. As is reported, companies like Tata, Adani and Torrent Power are engaged in buying Purvanchal and Dakshinanchal Vidyut Vitran Nigam. It is also true that whenever the BJP government has come to power in the country and the states, the privatization of the power sector has increased. During the Atal government, Enron had signed a power deal in which national interests were put at stake. The Electricity Act 2003, which opened the way for privatization at the national level, was passed during the BJP rule, and the division of the electricity board in Uttar Pradesh. Now the Modi government has come up with the Electricity Amendment Bill, which will end the system of subsidy and cross subsidy. According to an estimate, farmers will have to pay Rs 10,000 per month for irrigation connections of 7.5 horsepower. This will badly affect agricultural productivity. Not only this, the situation is so bad that Grant Thornton Company, which gave a false affidavit in America and was punished, was appointed as a transaction consultant against the rules, whose proposals have also been returned by the Electricity Regulatory Commission with objections.

In this privatization also, a big loot of government property is being carried out. According to the employees organizations, the Dakshinchal and Purvanchal Discoms, whose privatization has been announced, have works worth Rs. 42,968 crores going on in the Redeveloped Distribution Area Improvement Scheme. Also, under the business plan, works worth thousands of crores of rupees have been done and are still going on in Purvanchal and Dakshinchal. This money being spent from the government treasury made from the taxpayer’s money will be handed over to corporate companies for free. Not only this, there is an attempt to sell all the property and capital that the Discoms have for a pittance. This is the reason why no one is being told anything about the e-tender of these Discoms. Even rejecting the policy of transparency, information about this will not be available online because the government has put a condition that only those who participate in this tender process will be able to know about these tenders.

In fact, this privatization being done by the BJP government is against national interests, it is very important to make a political issue and to run a big dialogue campaign to alert the general public about the harm caused by it. Till now, only the top bureaucrats of the electricity department are being targeted by the employees organizations in the movement, which is not enough. There is a need to broaden the anti-privatization movement. Not only the Vidyut Karamchari Joint Sangharsh Samiti, but going beyond this, an anti-privatization platform should be formed for its leadership center. There is an immediate need to include anti-privatization parties, farmers’ organizations, various labour and employee organizations, student-youth organizations, environmentalists, civil society and people from the enlightened class in it.

Today electricity will come under the fundamental right of the common citizen. The dignity of the individual has been talked about in the Preamble of the Constitution and in Article 21 it is considered the responsibility of the government to ensure a dignified life. Today electricity is an essential condition for providing a dignified life to any citizen. Therefore, the decision of privatization is against the constitutional obligations of the state. There should also be a consideration of intervention in the court on this.

The kind of repression and oppression the government is doing and the constant restrictions are being imposed on leaders through the courts. There is a need to think about the form and methods of the movement as well. The birth and functioning of the trade union was in the era of the welfare state. Where the industrial capitalist system, terrorized by the rule of workers, adopted the welfare form of the system. Many rights were given in this era. Today the era has changed, this is the era of finance capital where the government and government institutions have become agents of a few capital houses. Now the entire government has moved towards a system of autocracy for the benefit and protection of these capital houses. Continuous attacks are being made on democratic rights and restrictions are being imposed on democratic activities. In such a situation, forms of movement like strike or work boycott are not very relevant in today’s era. Therefore, constitutional peaceful democratic methods of movement will have to be considered. Support of various sections of the society will have to be gained in favour of the anti-privatization movement through fasting and indefinite dharna. Above all, the ongoing movement against privatization has to be turned into a political movement and a big public dialogue needs to be conducted on this. Only when the people of the entire state stand up against it, the government will be forced to take back its steps on this.

Courtesy: Counter Currents

The post Political Movement against Privatization of Electricity is the Need of the Hour appeared first on SabrangIndia.

Among key demands of the general strike are the repeal of four Labour Codes, minimum support price (MSP@C2+50%) for all Crops, minimum wages of Rs.26000 per month, ‘No Privatisation of PSU’s’, the estoppal of ‘casualisation of employment’, ‘freedom from indebtedness’, all issues that are critical to protect Indian agriculture, industry and services.

The General Strike is also against the imposition of free trade agreements on Indian people. US’ dominance on world trade has unleashed all efforts to coerce the Modi Government to impose unfair trade terms and to dump US agricultural products in India.

The four Labour codes legalise contract labour based on hire and fire policy. Once implemented, say trade unions and farmer organisations, these Codes, will shatter not only the rights of the existing workforce but the entire new generations of workers in all sectors of the economy. The youth cannot dream of having access to formal employment with social security and retirement benefits. The right to an eight-hour work day will not sustain and new forms of slavery will be imposed on the working people under the guise of ‘ease of doing business’ to facilitate corporate profiteering.  Workers will lose the right to unionise, right to bargain for remunerative wage and right to strike. The four labour codes are both authoritarian and undemocratic in character, say the unions that will eventually endanger the independence of the working people and sovereignty of the country. Hence it is vital for all the freedom loving citizens to join the fight to bury the labour codes once and for all.

“Current economic policies are resulting in more unemployment, rising price rise of essential commodities, depression in wages, cut in social sector spending in education, health, basic civic amenities, all this leading to more inequalities and miseries for the poor, lower income group and even middle classes. The government has abandoned the welfare state focus of our country and is working in the interest of foreign and Indian corporates and it is so evident from its policies being pursued vigorously,” the trade union leaders said.

In a statement, they said the trade unions had been fighting against the privatisation of public sector enterprises and public services, the policies of outsourcing, contractualisation and casualisation of workforce, against the anti-workers, pro-employer four Labour Codes meant to suppress and cripple the trade union movement, increase in working hours, to snatch their right to collective bargaining, right to strike, decriminalisation of violation of labour laws by employers, while criminalising the activities of trade unions etc. “The government is making false claims on employment and provisions of social security. The existing social security schemes are being weakened and attempts to bring private players into it are pushed,” they said.

They also added that unions in the coal and minerals sectors, steel, banking and insurance sectors, power, petroleum and telecom industries and the transport sector have given notices for the strike. “We are making continued efforts forging unity and solidarity between the two major productive forces of the country, the workers and farmers,” they said.

Amarjeet Kaur, senior trade union leader and All India Trade Union Congress general secretary, has told the media that the strike is very significant to prepare working class and the farming community and agricultural labourers for a long-drawn battle. Questioning the government move to curb trade union rights, she said investors are not coming to India not because of workers, but because of the government policy of promoting one or two companies. She also asserted while speaking to The Hindu that this general strike will be the start of larger movements in India. When there are close to 15 lakh job vacancies in the central public sector units (PSUs) and central government, why has the Modi 3.0 government started recruiting those who are already retired for lesser salaries and without any social security? They have done this in Railways and in the steel sector.  This trend of outsourcing and contractualising many jobs is dangerous as it is causing widespread unemployment, she added.

The notices of the general strike have been served at banks, insurance companies, steel sector, coal sector, minerals and petroleum sector, copper sector and in some airports. Rail workers will also have mobilisations in support of strike, but no strike there. Defence sector is going on strike. The unions have predicted a “bandh-like” of situation in Assam, Tamil Nadu, Goa, Punjab, Bihar, Kerala, West Bengal and in many other States. Opposition parties have been approached by the unions, and they have extended their support. Workers in unions affiliated with the BMS (Bharatiya Mazdoor Saangh, an RSS affiliate) have also reportedly pledged support.

Which sectors are affected due to the Bharat Bandh?

1. Banking services
2. Postal services
3. Coal mining and factories
4. State transport services
5. Public sector units and government departments

What’s open on Bharat Bandh?

1. Schools and colleges
2. Private offices

Other complaints of the striking organisations include the fact that the government has not been conducting the annual labour conference for the last decade s and continues to take decisions in contravention to the interest of labour force, attempting to impose four labour codes to weaken collective bargaining, to cripple unions’ activities and to favour employers in the name of ‘ease of doing business’.

The forum also alleged that the economic policies are resulting in acute unemployment, rising prices of essential commodities, depression in wages, cut in social sector spending in education, health, basic civic amenities, and all these are leading to more inequalities and miseries for poor, people of lower income group as well as the middle class.

In a statement put out on the eve of the general strike, the Samyukta Kisan Morcha (SKM) has also appealed to people to make the general strike on July 9, 2025 a grand success. Among key demands as stated above are the repeal of four Labour Codes, MSP@C2+50% for all Crops, Minimum Wage of Rs.26000 / month, ‘No Privatisation of PSU’s’, ‘Stop Casualisation of Employment’, ‘Freedom from Indebtedness’, all of which are critical to protect Agriculture, Industry and Services.

Apart from supporting demands of the workers, SKM urges the peasantry to intensify struggle on independent demands including enact law for MSP@C2+50% with guaranteed procurement for all crops, comprehensive loan waiver to free the peasantry from the debt trap and end rampant peasant suicides across India, withdrawal of National Policy Framework on Agriculture Marketing, not to sign the Indo-US Bilateral Trade Agreement hurting agriculture, industry and services, no privatisation of electricity, end indiscriminate acquisition of land violating the LARR Act 2013, ensure 200 days’ work and Rs.600 as daily wages in NREGS, provide minimum wage, social security and Rs. 10000 monthly pensions for agricultural workers, peasants and rural labourers, formalisation of Scheme workers, legal protection to the rights of migrant workers and tenant farmers among others.  The SKM has also called upon the entire working people including farmers, workers and agricultural workers to rally massively to hold tehsil level demonstrations and make the General strike successful.

The General Strike is also against the imposition of free trade agreements on Indian people. US’ dominance on world trade has unleashed all efforts to coerce the Modi Government to impose unfair trade terms and to dump US agricultural products in India. The intention of the free trade agreement is ‘unregulated freedom for US food chains, trading giants and agribusiness corporations to operate in India.’ ‘Tariff free import of huge quantity of highly subsidised milk and milk products, soybean, cotton, mice, wheat, rice, pulses, oilseeds, paddy, GM crops, fruits and vegetables including apple and walnuts, processed and canned foods’ into Indian markets will devastate the income and livelihood of Indian farmers.

The Trump Administration has been compelling the Modi Government to wind up PDS food distribution and withdraw all subsidies for farmers on fuel and fertilisers, says the SKM. It wants India to change its patent laws to suit American companies. These changes will erode the independence of Indian farmers and bring disastrous impact on food security.

The SKM statement also asserts that the Indian people will not accept the ‘enslavement of the workforce’ through four Labour Codes and corporatisation of agriculture. The farmers are on a path of struggle for the last two decades and more to achieve the long pending demands of MSP2 C2+50% with guaranteed procurement and comprehensive loan waiver.

Minimum wage to workers and minimum support price to the farmers are crucial to accomplish higher purchasing power, employment generation and agriculture led growth of the domestic economy. Reversing the anti-worker, anti-farmer policies of the RSS-BJP combine is indispensable to protect the interests of the working people and the country.

This is the 22nd General Strike since the advent of neo-liberal policies in India in 1991.  The success of July 9, 2025 strike will ignite more massive, mightier struggles larger than the 2020-21 historic farmers struggle at Delhi borders actively supported by the working class, states the SKM. The massive strike will be intensified until all the genuine demands of the workers and the peasantry are realised. SKM appeals to the entire working people to make the July 9, 2025 General strike as one of the largest ever worker-peasant united action since independence.

Meanwhile, the Central Kisan Committee (CKC) meeting of the All India Kisan Sabha (AIKS) held from June 28-30, 2025 at the E K Nayanar Academy, Kannur, Kerala, decided to hold massive protests on July 9, along with the Samyukta Kisan Morcha (SKM) at the tehsil level, and work actively to make the General Strike called by the Central Trade Unions (CTUs) a massive success.

The meeting at Kannur discussed the grim agrarian scenario in the country, and the anti-farmer, pro-corporate policies of the BJP-led NDA government. It also noted that the Congress-led State Governments in Karnataka, Telangana etc are also carrying forward the BJP Government’s policies like Labour Codes, 12-hour work day, land acquisition etc.

The meeting warned against the hurried moves of the Modi regime to sign Free Trade Agreements (FTAs) with UK (already signed), USA, EU, etc., which surrender the interests of farmers, workers and MSME entrepreneurs, violate federal principles and put Parliament in the dark. These FTAs will drastically reduce or eliminate import duties on key agricultural products, threatening the livelihoods of millions of Indian farmers, stated the AIKS.

Related:

Safai Shramik Union raises demands for a law that safeguards rights of sanitation workers: Maharashtra

Anganwadi Workers are Right: They Need More Money

Farmers protests: Court reprimands Punjab government on filing ‘zero-FIR’ for case of alleged police brutality

The post As 30 crore workers, farmers join July 9 strike against govt.’s policies, will there be media coverage of the shut down? appeared first on SabrangIndia.