The Chief Election Commissioner
New Delhi
20 August 2025

Hon’ble Sir

Please allow me to introduce my humble self.

I inherited a furniture business from my late father, Behramji Navrozeji Puranafurniturewala.  I love to tinker with vintage furniture. I chisel and polish them to befit the glory of Amrit Kaal.  I am also known for my observations on social events. I write occasional letters to global leaders who, I would like to believe, value my sharp analysis of current affairs and my typical Bawa sangfroid!

I have been watching the Special Intensive Revision exercise in Bihar (SIR) with great interest. I laud your most noble goal of disqualifying folks who have no business to be in our glorious land and who should have no contact, whatsoever, with our holy ballot boxes.

Unprincipled elements have, however, created a foul narrative that suggests that you are deviously invalidating citizenship rights of people. Where you say you have rightfully expunged 6.5 mill folks in Bihar from the electoral rolls, those who envy your powers say that you have denied 6.5 mill folks their rights!

Your goal is honorable. Sir.  Do not shy away from it. I implore you to embark on this mission nationwide. I would only recommend that you simplify your methods to those that ordinary people can relate to.

Here are some suggestions on simplifying the Indian citizenship exercise:

• A self-attested affidavit confirming that the applicant has on numerous occasions given or accepted “donations of gratitude” to get things accomplished when official methods did not yield desired results, with examples of no less than five instances of merit. This is the surest way to certify that the applicant has Indian DNA.
• Men can provide self-attested affidavits confirming that they have been living their lives following the purest traditions of patriarchy, archetypal in our land. They can provide examples of their practices, habits and rituals that validate their claim. Once their claims have been found valid, which should be routine, all women living with such men should be granted automatic citizenship.
• Those owning vehicles or driving ones for vehicle owners, can self-certify how many times a day they hoot or honk or park their vehicles in “No Parking zones”. Those exceeding five times a day, must be regarded as citizens. Those falling short must undergo “appropriate orientation”, before re-applying.
• People who live in neighborhoods that are unsanitary by any hygiene standards – those living near piles of garbage, those willfully disposing off garbage on the roads, in the rivers, in public spaces, those who walk past garbage multiple times during the day without batting an eyelid, should easily qualify as Indian citizens. A simple self-attestation with relevant pictures of garbage as described in above situations, should suffice.
• What about folks who live most of their lives in the digital world? They should be treated with equal courtesy. Folks with social media profiles that discredit others on the basis of their caste, class, gender, color, orientation should be considered native citizens and can provide self-attestation with screenshots of their social media posts.
• Those who have refined “spitting” to a fine art and who can deploy their oral colored projectiles with pinpoint accuracy should send five unique photographs of their artwork and claim citizenship.
• Those who employ people and pay them way below “living wages” and / or make them work over 70 hours a week, ought to be a special category of citizens. No evidence should be required for such stellar folks.

I hope you get the drift. Your team can no doubt be a lot more creative and find easier and more convenient means of citizen identification.

Seeking documentary evidence like birth certificates, domicile certificates, passports, education certificates, caste certificates, family registers, land / house allotment certificates, has spooked folks of varying social class and literacy.

You may recall that the Hon’ble PM once said “There is simplicity in every Indian”. Hence expectations from them must also be innocent and simple. The documentary evidence that I have recommended will be recognized by folks across levels of social classes and literacy. These can be provided easily without much struggle. It will also obviate the need to employ short cut methods by your staff to “fill and sign the forms on behalf of the people without their knowledge” as has been alleged by some annoying elements of society.

I would also urge that you make the results public. Names of all who have qualified as citizens along with the basis of their citizenship should be made public. This will dispel all notions of ECI being opaque and arbitrary in its methods. Nomenclature of “citizenship categories” should be simple such as – Gratification Donor, Hooter, No Parking Veteran, Patriarch, Living with Patriarch, Digital Irritant, Living in Empathy with Garbage, Accomplished Spitter and Star Employer.

A welcome outcome of this exercise, if simplified as suggested, will be the easy exclusion of those who bring impediments to the growth and prosperity of our nation. These are folks who want to change things. They move around being honest, purposeful, sincere and caring. And trying to make a difference to other people’s lives! In other words, not minding their own business! For inexplicable reasons, they dream of an India that once celebrated its diversity and found strength in it – an India that should provide equal opportunity and dignity to all! Is such a nation desirable?

Your faithful and most law abiding citizen (by the Hooter criteria)

Cyrus Behramji Puranafurniturewala

Related:

A Satirical Plea, Dripping with Envy, to President Xi Jinping of China

Seeking a Leader for Life – A satire

Cyrus calling Dhruv Rathee

A Cooperative Housing Society “embraces” the Vision of Viksit Bharat 2047

What are you doing Bro? Cyrus writes a 20 Point, Open Letter to Rahul Gandhi

The post A Satirical Imperative Request (SIR) to the CEC of India appeared first on SabrangIndia.

Following on two earlier reports released by the citizen’s platform in 2024, the report on the Lok Sabha elections and the Haryana and Jammu & Kashmir state assembly elections, this 214 page report includes a detailed study of the manner in which data has been collected for the ongoing Bihar Special Intensive Revision (SIR). The large section of analysis that deals with Maharashtra reveals shocking discrepancies between official data published by the CEO, Maharashtra  and the ECI, Delhi, massive post-midnight unexplained surges in voter/elector percentages and disproportionate spikes in Elector numbers since 2019 (Lok Sabha and Vidhan Sabha) and 2024 (Lok Sabha and Vidhan Sabha). Apart from anything else the report lists the close margin seats (amounting to 133 out of the state’s 283 seats) where stakes were high: 25 seats won by less than 3,000 votes, 39 seats by less than 5,000 votes and another 69 seats with less than 10,000 — suggesting that small anomalies could change outcomes.

At the outset, the current report released by Vote for Democracy, lays out what the ‘Weaponisation’ of India’s Election System? (IES) has amounted to since around 2017 onwards:

“The EVM-centred voting system has four critical components. Microchips to record the votes as cast by the voter, Voter Verifiable Paper Audit Trail (VVPATs) to audit and verify that the votes are recorded as cast and counted as recorded and Symbol Loading Units (SLUs) that upload the name and symbol of the candidates contesting on a particular seat on EVM/VVPAT. The fact that post 2017, the EVS (electronic voting system) is no more stand-alone but linked to the internet with the SLU having a labile memory has made the system susceptible to manipulation/meddling. The fourth critical component in the IES is Electoral Roll which is the voter’s list and because of the methods adopted by the Election Commission of India (ECI) large scale ‘disenfranchisement’ of voters looms large. Cumulatively these constitute the ‘weaponisation’ of IES. If allowed to continue it could sound the death-knell of electoral democracy!”

The detailed report also lists, with close to two dozen tables and 21 graphs the key findings related to the Maharashtra Vidhan Sabha elections of 2024.

Key findings (Maharashtra)

1. Unexplained midnight turnout surge

1. 5 PM turnout: 58.22%; midnight: 66.05% — a 7.83% jump (~48 lakh extra votes).
2. Spikes: Nanded (+13.57%), Jalgaon (+11.11%), Hingoli (+11.06%), Solapur (+10.63%), Beed (+10.56%), Dhule (+10.46%).
3. Historically, late surges are minimal.

2. Close margins, high stakes

• 25 seats won by <3,000 votes; 39 seats by <5,000; 69 seats by <10,000 — meaning small anomalies could change outcomes.

3. Erratic and unverifiable voter roll changes

• Between the May 2024 Lok Sabha elections and November 2024 Assembly polls — just six months — Maharashtra’s electoral roll ballooned by over 46 lakh voters.
• The increase was concentrated in about 12,000 polling booths spread across 85 constituencies — predominantly in seats the BJP had lost in the Lok Sabha elections.
• Some booths saw 600+ new voters added after 5 PM, implying an implausible 10+ hours of extra voting time that did not occur in reality.
• Official elector data fluctuated wildly:
  • August 30, 2024: The ECI reported 9,64,85,765 voters, but the CEO Maharashtra’s own press release for the same date listed only 9,53,74,302 — a gap of over 11 lakh.
  • October 15, 2024: The CEO’s figure dropped slightly to 9,63,69,410.
  • October 30, 2024: Just 15 days later, the CEO’s figure surged to 9,70,25,119 — an increase of more than 16 lakh voters in two weeks.

4. Large-scale election data mismatches (2019–2024)

• In 2019, Maharashtra had 8,86,76,946 voters for Lok Sabha and 8,98,38,267 for Vidhan Sabha — an increase of 11,61,321 voters in just a few months. Votes polled rose from 5,35,65,479 (Lok Sabha) to 5,44,07,794 (Vidhan Sabha) — an increase of 8,42,315
• In 2024, the state had 9,30,61,760 voters for Lok Sabha and 9,70,25,119 for Vidhan Sabha — an increase of 39,53,259 voters in less than six months.
• Votes polled jumped from 5,69,69,708 (Lok Sabha) to 6,40,85,091 (Vidhan Sabha) — 71,15,383 more votes in the Assembly election than in the Lok Sabha election held the same year.
• Between 2019 and 2024:
  • Lok Sabha voter rolls grew by 43,94,814, but votes polled increased by only 34,04,229.
  • Vidhan Sabha voter rolls grew by 71,86,852, while votes polled increased by 96,77,257.
• The disproportionately high voter participation in the 2024 Assembly polls compared to the Lok Sabha— and the sharp, unexplained increase in registered voters within months — has not been explained by the Election Commission of India or the CEO Maharashtra.

Disproportionate Spikes:

12. SIX MONTHS Between 2019 LS and 2019 Assembly:         +12.7 lakh electors.
13. FIVE YEARS Between 2019 LS and 2024 LS:                    +37.9–45 lakh.
14. FIVE MONTHS Between 2019 LS and 2024 Assembly:         +84.6 lakh.
15. SIX MONTHS Between May–Nov 2024 (LS to Assembly): +41 lakh.
16. SEVEN MONTHS Between March–Oct 2024 (LS to Assembly): +46.7 lakh.

• These inconsistencies point to major roll integrity concerns and require urgent ECI and CEO Maharashtra clarification.

5. Sudden vote surges benefiting specific parties

• In the Lok Sabha elections (May 2024), BJP averaged 88,713 votes per Assembly segment.
• In the Assembly elections (November 2024), BJP averaged 116,064 votes per seat — a sudden 28,000 vote increase per seat without matching demographic growth.
• Examples:
  • Kamthi: Congress vote stayed flat (~1.35 lakh) while BJP gained 56,000 votes; voter list increased by 35,000.
  • Karad (South): 41,000 more votes than six months earlier — a rise not seen in five years.
• In the Nanded Lok Sabha by-election, Congress won the parliamentary seat but lost all six Assembly segments in the same area, with 1.59 lakh fewer votes at the Assembly level despite simultaneous polling. 

6. High-profile anomalies

• Nagpur South West added 29,219 voters in 6 months — above ECI’s 4% verification threshold; BLOs confirmed incomplete checks.
• Markadwadi village, Solapur, alleged EVM results did not reflect actual votes; police blocked a paper-ballot mock poll.

7. Procedural and technical anomalies

• Reports of routers near polling stations, sudden power cuts during counting, EVMs arriving late at strong rooms, CCTV failures, and alleged strong room breaches.
• In some booths, EVM batteries showed 99% at counting start, inconsistent with normal discharge.
• Mismatches between Form 17C (polling station record) and Control Unit counts.
• VVPAT concerns: potential internet connectivity and no public audit of slips.
• Questions over whether ECI independently controls EVM source code.
• Conflict of interest: BJP members on boards of ECIL & BEL — EVM manufacturers.

8. Data secrecy and legal changes curtailing scrutiny

• December 2024: ECI amended Rule 93 of the Conduct of Election Rules to restrict access to CCTV footage and Form 17C — just days after a court ordered their release in another state’s polls.
• May 2025: Retention of election CCTV footage cut from up to one year to 45 days, enabling destruction of crucial evidence before legal challenges can proceed.
• Despite 100% webcasting of polling stations, neither video footage nor VVPAT slips are available for public verification. 

9. Inaction on hate speech

• Despite 100+ complaints during the Maharashtra polls, including from specific constituencies and named leaders, no visible ECI action was taken. 

Why Maharashtra Matters

The scale, precision, and constituency targeting of these anomalies suggest a structured pattern of electoral manipulation — not random administrative error. Maharashtra’s 2024 Assembly election case study stands as a warning for future polls across India.

While the report briefly notes concerns over Bihar’s Special Intensive Revision of rolls, Maharashtra offers the clearest, most data-backed evidence of the “weaponisation” of India’s election system.

The press release dated August 16 echoes the demands raised in the Report:

• De-centralise voter system: ECI to conduct only Parliamentary/Presidential elections; State ECs to conduct Assembly and local polls. They should be strengthened suitably.
• Immediate forensic audit of EVMs, VVPATs, and voter rolls.
• Public release of machine-readable rolls, Form 17A/17C, and CCTV footage.
• Rollback of restrictive Rule 93 amendments; restore transparency safeguards.
• Legislative guarantees for end-to-end vote verifiability.

Related:

The curious case of Mumbai Mahanagari’s 36 seats: who holds the winning card?

Congress raises alarm over manipulated voter rolls in Maharashtra Assembly elections

Vote for Democracy: Statistical, legal and procedural irregularities dot Bihar’s controversial SIR process

EVM row: Winning MLA from Malshiras (Markadwadi) issues ultimatum to ECI, demands elections by ballot papers

Markadwadi, Pune, Sholapur, Akola, are protests against ECI mounting in Maharashtra?

Bihar SIR: 65 Lakh electors flagged for deletion, SC said “if there is mass exclusion, we will immediately step in”

ECI to SC: Voter ID insufficient for Bihar roll, defends citizenship verification power

Punjab University’s former dean writes to CJI: Bihar SIR threatens democracy, alleges ECI overreach & voter disenfranchisement

Non-Electors Within Electors: ECI reports over 61 lakh potential exclusions

The post Major Irregularities in 2024 Maharashtra Vidhan Sabha Polls; Vote for Democracy appeared first on SabrangIndia.

The entire text of the letter may be read here:

To

Shri Gyanesh Kumar

Chief Election Commissioner

Dr Sukhbir Singh Sandhu

Election Commissioner

Dr Vivek Joshi

Election Commissioner

Dear S/Shri Gyanesh Kumar, Sandhu and Joshi,

Many TV channels have just now aired a press conference held by the leader of a national political party today (https://youtu.be/fi9Y0yWsPkg), in which he alleged irregularities in the preparation of electoral rolls in Karnataka and a few other States. His allegations revolving around factual information, seemed to be based on an audit of hard copies of electoral rolls available in the public domain. 

If I were to be in your place in the Election Commission, I would have ordered a thorough verification of the factual information released in the press conference to satisfy myself of the veracity of the basis for the allegations, as those allegations, if they were to be factually correct, would have serious implications for the integrity of electoral rolls in general. 

In my view, each one of you, responsible under Article 324 of the Constitution to enhance the overall credibility of the electoral process, should readily take cognizance of each and every complaint of that kind and suo moto get such a complaint verified, as feedback of that kind would help the Commission to identify the shortcomings in every segment of the electoral process and take corrective measures.  

What surprised me was that the Chief Electoral Officer (CEO) of Karnataka lost no time in issuing a notice to the concerned political leader calling upon him to “substantiate his claims of electoral fraud with a signed declaration under oath, as per Rule 20(3)(b) of the Registration of Electors Rules, 1960”.

I am sure that the CEO would not have responded so promptly without keeping the Commission informed. The impression I get from this that the Commission and its officers treat every complainant as an adversary and, instead of taking advantage of the contents of the complaint as a means to scrutinise the integrity of preparation of electoral rolls at the ground level, call upon the complainant to swear that the complaint is based on facts, whereas all those facts could be readily cross-verified with the help of the enormous resources they have at their command. It appears to me that the Commission and its machinery are more anxious to prove that the complainant is wrong than welcoming such a complaint as a part of a readily available feedback system that helps the Commission in constantly improving its internal procedures and practices. The effectiveness of the Commission  depends crucially on its ability to respond to public complaints in a meaningful manner and its ability to elicit public trust. If it closes its doors to public complaints and complaints from political parties, it loses the advantage of using such complaints as a means to correct its own internal procedures in a transparent manner. I am afraid that the Commission, in recent times, let go of such excellent opportunities, as it has resorted to treating complainants as adversaries.

In this connection, I refer to a letter I addressed you some time ago in which I had expressed my concerns about several issues that remained unaddressed, that would erode the credibility of the electoral process. While the Commission may not care to respond to a letter from a senior citizen like me, the least that the Commission could have done was to ponder over the concerns expressed by me and take appropriate corrective measures. To the best of my understanding, the Commission has chosen to ignore those concerns, perhaps adopting its usual stance of treating all such complaints as irritants.

Once again, let me caution you that the Commission’s effectiveness as an apolitical Constitutional authority would critically depend on its ability to respond to public complaints in a constructive manner, rather than treating them as vexatious.

All the best,

Yours sincerely,

E A S Sarma

Former Secretary to the Government of India

Visakhapatnam 

Related:

Rahul Gandhi alleges ‘Vote Chori’ in 2024 polls, accuses BJP-ECI nexus of systematic electoral fraud

SC to ECI: Explain alleged irregularities in deletion of 65 lakh voters from Bihar’s draft electoral rolls

Bihar’s SIR process reveals an exercise of illegitimate powers, ECI forcing district machinery to resort to unethical practices: CCG’s Open Letter

Non-Electors Within Electors: ECI reports over 61 lakh potential exclusions

Principles of secret ballot, free will compromised, electronic surveillance a possibility with Voting APP introduced by the ECI: Expert

Memo to ECI: Make Voter’s Form 17Cs list accessible on Commission website, clean up existing, technologically messy EVS structure, say citizens

The post Election Commission must take the Indian people into confidence, correct its procedures & practices appeared first on SabrangIndia.

However, the ECI’s figures also highlight a large number of electors identified for potential exclusion. These includes, 21.6 lakh deceased electors, 31.5 lakh electors who have permanently migrated, 7 lakh electors found to be registered at more than one location, 1 lakh electors categorised as “untraceable.” Fewer than 7 lakh electors whose forms have not yet been received despite door-to-door visits by Booth Level Officers (BLOs) and Booth Level Agents (BLAs).

Combined, these figures suggest that over 61 lakh voters could potentially be excluded from the draft electoral roll. The ECI maintains that the primary aim of the Bihar SIR is to ensure no eligible voter is left out while ineligible names are removed, asserting its constitutional mandate to protect the integrity of electoral rolls. 

To this end, booth-level lists of those who haven’t filled forms, deceased, and permanently migrated electors were shared with all political parties on July 20, 2025, for error verification. Furthermore, electors and political parties have until September 1, 2025, to file claims for missing names or raise objections to incorrect inclusions.

This latest data from the ECI comes amidst intense political backlash and growing concerns. Just yesterday, July 24, reports highlighted a shocking 809% surge in “untraceable” electors in Bihar, jumping from 11,484 on July 22 to 1 lakh by July 23. Overall deletions had also dramatically increased by 3 lakhs in just 24 hours, reaching 56 lakhs by July 23. Opposition parties, led by RJD leader Tejashwi Yadav, have threatened to boycott the upcoming state polls, alleging that the SIR is a “sinister plot” by the Modi government to disenfranchise marginalised communities and manipulate electoral outcomes.

ECI’s press note dated 24.07.2025 can be read here:

INDIA Bloc protests, Kharge dramatically tears symbolic SIR document and placed in dustbin

The political climate in Parliament became strained as the INDIA bloc maintained its protests for a third consecutive day at outside the parliament. The bloc expressed strong disapproval of the Election Commission of India’s (ECI) ongoing Special Intensive Revision (SIR) process in Bihar. Members of Parliament from the opposition parties conducted a demonstration outside Parliament, conveying their opposition to what they characterise as an attempt to alter voter lists. Their protest commenced with a march from Prerna Sthal to Makar Dwar. The opposition has voiced concerns that this process in Bihar could precede a broader effort concerning voter registration nationwide.

The INDIA bloc MPs staged a protest outside Parliament premises, expressing strong objections to the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) exercise being undertaken by the Election Commission of India in Bihar.

New Delhi pic.twitter.com/YPtOsRql1x

— Congress (@INCIndia) July 25, 2025

During the INDIA bloc’s protest, Mallikarjun Kharge, the Leader of Opposition in the Rajya Sabha, tore up a symbolic SIR document and placed it in a dustbin. This action, which was widely observed, represented the opposition’s rejection of the ECI’s plans for voter list revisions.

Kharge openly challenged the ECI’s proposed nationwide SIR, referencing its notification dated June 24. He criticised the government, stating, “The Modi government’s aim is to hinder the voting participation of the poor, Dalits, tribals, backward classes, minorities, and the disadvantaged, in order to modify the Constitution of India in accordance with the Manusmriti.”

| LoP in Rajya Sabha, #MallikarjunKharge, symbolically tears up the #SIR and throws it into a dustbin during the INDIA bloc’s protest on the Parliament premises.#Parliament #MonsoonSession2025 #TheStatesman pic.twitter.com/rydRLJ7FGB

— The Statesman (@TheStatesmanLtd) July 25, 2025

He further elaborated, “The RSS-BJP has always wanted to deprive the weaker sections of society of their voting rights, and now, through the use of SIR, it is determined to fulfil its long-standing intention.” 

The Congress President expressed profound disappointment, stating, “It is deeply unfortunate that a constitutional institution like the Election Commission is supporting the BJP-RSS in this conspiracy of ‘vote suppression.” He brought to light alleged ground realities, claiming, “The entire country has seen how, in Bihar, the Election Commission’s BLOs are making their own people fill out forms to strip the deprived sections of society of their voting rights.” 

Kharge warned of a broader implication, asserting, “Now, the Election Commission will carry out this same task across the entire country. The BJP has an aversion to the Constitution of India and democracy. Every day, it devises new ways to attack the Constitution created by Babasaheb Dr. Ambedkar and Pandit Nehru.” 

चुनाव आयोग ने आज आधिकारिक एलान किया है कि वह Special Intensive Revision (SIR) Exercise पूरे देश में लागू करेगा।

मोदी सरकार ग़रीबों, दलितों, आदिवासियों, पिछड़े वर्ग, अल्पसंख्यकों और वंचितों के वोट काटना चाहती है, ताकि वो भारत के संविधान को मनुस्मृति के मुताबिक बदलाव कर सके।… pic.twitter.com/wGjYXIADGL

— Mallikarjun Kharge (@kharge) July 25, 2025

Amidst the storm of protests and accusations, the Election Commission of India’s June 24 order on the Special Intensive Revision of Electoral Rolls stands as a crucial point of contention. In its order, the ECI explicitly stated, “Commission has now decided to begin the Special Intensive Revision in the entire country for the discharge of its constitutional mandate to protect the integrity of electoral rolls…The schedule for SIR in the rest of the country will be issued in due course.” 

“100% solid proof of vote theft!” – Rahul Gandhi

The Congress MP and Leader of Opposition, Rahul Gandhi, entering the fray with an explosive claim. Gandhi directly challenged the ECI, stating, “The Election Commission should not remain under any illusion! We have 100% solid proof of your tactics to steal votes.” 

चुनाव आयोग गलतफहमी में न रहे!

वोट चोरी करने के आपके हथकंडों के 100% पुख्ता सबूत हैं हमारे पास।

हम उन्हें सामने भी लाएंगे और आप इसके अंजाम से बच नहीं पाएंगे – लोकतंत्र और संविधान को बर्बाद करने की कोशिश करने वाले बक्शे नहीं जाएंगे। pic.twitter.com/gYAVbDo20O

— Rahul Gandhi (@RahulGandhi) July 24, 2025

He issued a stern warning, asserting, “We will bring them to light, and you will not escape the consequences – those who try to destroy democracy and the constitution will not be spared.” 

“Misleading and Baseless!” – commission rejects Gandhi’s allegations

In a swift and unequivocal response, the Election Commission of India, through its official X handle, categorically rejected Rahul Gandhi’s severe allegations. The ECI’s official statement declared, “the claim made in this social media post is misleading and baseless.” 

#ECIFactCheck

इस सोशल मीडिया पोस्ट में किया गया दावा भ्रामक और निराधार है

विस्तार में जानने के लिए, नीचे दिए गए इस मुख्य निर्वाचन अधिकारी, कर्नाटक के लिंक को देखिए।https://t.co/TBcX8aUwji

चित्र में विवरण पढ़ें https://t.co/fdiDWMDttL pic.twitter.com/HZ73NxwlJc

— Election Commission of India (@ECISVEEP) July 24, 2025

Moreover, as the deadline for form submission will close tomorrow, the focus now shifts to the publication of the draft electoral roll-on August 1 and the subsequent claims and objections period. The significant numbers of potential deletions and the deep-seated concerns of the opposition ensure that the Bihar SIR will remain a heated topic as the state heads towards its assembly elections.

Related

ECI to SC: Voter ID insufficient for Bihar roll, defends citizenship verification power

Bihar:  SC signals that ECI should consider Aadhaar, EPIC (Voter ID card) & Ration card for electoral roll revision 

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

The post Non-Electors Within Electors: ECI reports over 61 lakh potential exclusions appeared first on SabrangIndia.

The Election Commission of India (ECI), the constitutional entity tasked with ensuring free and fair elections, has recently taken a step that signals a disquieting retreat from transparency into a constitutionally suspect zone of opacity. The ECI, reportedly, has mandated the destruction of all election-related CCTV, webcasting, and video footage after a mere 45-day period post-declaration of results. This executive order, presented as a benign administrative update, is in fact a measure with profound constitutional implications, posing a direct and formidable challenge to the foundational principles of electoral integrity, the citizen’s fundamental right to information, and the overarching rule of law.

This article posits that the ECI’s directive is a facially unconstitutional act. It is a colourable exercise of power that is manifestly arbitrary, directly infringes upon the fundamental rights to information and equality as enshrined in Articles 19(1)(a) and 14 of the Constitution of India, and systematically dismantles the architecture of electoral justice. By ordering the pre-emptive destruction of the most crucial and unimpeachable evidence of electoral conduct, the directive effectively sabotages the statutory right to challenge an election, thereby undermining the basic structure of the Constitution, which is predicated on the pillars of democratic accountability and judicial review.

The analysis herein will proceed in a structured manner to build this constitutional challenge. First, it will deconstruct the impugned directive and its legislative predicate—the controversial December 2024 amendment to Rule 93(2)(a) of the Conduct of Election Rules, 1961—to reveal an architecture of engineered obscurity. Second, it will examine the nature and limits of the ECI’s plenary powers under Article 324, arguing that these powers are intended to be a shield for democracy, not a sword against its core principles. Third, the article will establish the directive’s irreconcilable conflict with the judicially fortified fundamental right of the voter to be informed, a right that has been repeatedly expanded and protected by the Supreme Court. Fourth, it will apply the rigorous test of arbitrariness, as articulated under Article 14, to expose the flimsiness of the ECI’s official justifications. Finally, the article will conclude with a call for reversal to restore the vital light of transparency to India’s electoral process, without which democracy itself is diminished.

I. The Architecture of Obscurity: The Directive and its Legislative Precursor

To comprehend the full constitutional import of the ECI’s data destruction mandate, it is essential to first dissect the policy itself and place it in its immediate legal and historical context. The directive issued on May 30, 2025 did not emerge in a vacuum. It is the culmination of a two-pronged administrative and legislative strategy that has progressively and systematically constricted the avenues for public and judicial scrutiny of the electoral process. This section will detail this strategic construction of an opaque regime, beginning with the directive’s radical departure from established policy, followed by an analysis of its legislative foundation, and concluding with a deconstruction of the untenable justifications offered by the Commission.

A. The May 30, 2025 Directive: A Drastic Reversal of Policy

The directive reportedly mandates that all “CCTV data, webcasting data and photography of election processes at various stages” shall be preserved for a period of only 45 days following the declaration of results. After this period, if no election petition pertaining to the specific constituency has been filed, the letter instructs that “the said data may be destroyed”.

This new policy represents a sharp and dramatic reversal of the ECI’s earlier guidelines. The earlier framework—outlined in a 2024 memo issued to all Chief Electoral Officers of states—had established a more nuanced and robust retention schedule.

Under those guidelines, the retention period for video and photographic evidence was tiered according to the specific stage of the electoral process, acknowledging the varying evidentiary relevance of different records. For instance, footage from the pre-nomination period was to be kept for three months, while recordings of critical processes like nomination, campaigning, polling, and counting were to be preserved for periods ranging from six months to a full year. This tiered system provided a reasonable and extended window for the discovery of irregularities and the gathering of evidence.

The new directive collapses this logical, multi-tiered structure into a single, dangerously short, 45-day deadline for all forms of electronic footage. The ECI has explicitly linked this 45-day period to the limitation for filing an election petition under Section 81 of the Representation of the People Act, 1951. The radical nature of this policy shift is best illustrated by a direct comparison.

B. The Legislative Precursor: The December 2024 Amendment to Rule 93(2)(a)

The ECI’s data destruction directive was preceded and enabled by a crucial legislative change. In December 2024, the Union Ministry of Law and Justice, acting on the recommendation of the ECI, amended Rule 93 of the Conduct of Election Rules, 1961. The original text of Rule 93(2)(a) was a broad, inclusive provision that stated “all other papers relating to the election shall be open to public inspection”.

The amendment was deceptively simple. It inserted the phrase “as specified in these rules” into the provision. The amended rule now reads: “all other papers as specified in these rules relating to the election shall be open to public inspection”. Since electronic records like CCTV footage, webcasting clips, and video recordings are not explicitly “specified” in the Rules as inspectable papers, this amendment effectively created a legal shield, removing them from the ambit of public inspection.

The timing of this amendment is highly suggestive of its intent. It was pushed through just two weeks after the Punjab and Haryana High Court, acting on a petition filed by advocate Mehmood Pracha, had directed the ECI to release election papers and videography related to the Haryana Assembly elections, as reported by The Hindu. The clear cause-and-effect relationship indicates that the amendment was not a proactive measure for good governance but a reactive manoeuvre designed to pre-empt further judicial orders compelling transparency. It was a move from a default-open system to a default-closed system. This legislative change laid the groundwork for the subsequent administrative directive; once access to the footage was legally restricted, the next logical step was to mandate its physical destruction.

This amendment has not gone unchallenged. A plea filed by transparency activist Anjali Bhardwaj is currently pending before the Supreme Court, arguing that the amendment imposes “unreasonable restrictions on the fundamental right to information of voters” and seeks to keep crucial records out of the purview of public disclosure.

C. Deconstructing the ECI’s Justifications: A Veil of Plausible Deniability

The 2024 memo and later reports reveal a trio of justifications by the ECI for its new policy, each of which wilts under scrutiny and appears to be a veil for the directive’s true effect of fostering opacity.

1. The “Internal Management Tool” Fallacy: The Commission has claimed that videography and CCTV footage are not mandated by law but are used merely as an “internal management tool”. This characterisation is a gross misrepresentation of the role these technologies play in modern elections. The ECI’s own circulars state and call for use of CCTV and videography for a wide spectrum of critical processes. This includes the First Level Checking (FLC) of EVMs, the security of strong rooms where EVMs are stored, surveillance of critical polling stations, and the entire counting process. The existence of such detailed, mandatory protocols demonstrates that these recordings are not a peripheral or optional extra; they are an integral and indispensable component of the ECI’s own framework for ensuring electoral integrity. To dismiss them as a mere “internal tool” is to contradict its own established procedures and suggests a post-facto rationalization for an otherwise indefensible policy of destruction.
2. The Exaggerated “Voter Privacy” Concern: The ECI has also cited the need to protect voter privacy, arguing that the release of footage could lead to the identification of voters and expose them to pressure, discrimination, or intimidation. While voter privacy is a legitimate concern, the ECI’s solution—the complete and permanent destruction of all footage—is a disproportionate and extreme response. It is an argument that sacrifices the integrity of the entire electoral process at the altar of a speculative and manageable risk. Numerous less restrictive alternatives exist to balance privacy with accountability. For instance, access could be mediated through court orders, which is an existing process; footage could be redacted to obscure the faces of ordinary voters not involved in any alleged malpractice, or access could be limited to specific segments relevant to a legal challenge. The ECI’s choice of the most extreme option—annihilation of the record—over these balanced alternatives reveals that privacy is likely a pretext, not the primary driver of the policy.
3. The “Malicious Narratives” Pretext: The most heavily relied-upon justification is the need to curb the “recent misuse of this content by non-contestants for spreading misinformation and malicious narratives on social media”. This was also a concern mentioned in the 2024 memo. Objectively, this rationale is constitutionally perilous. It amounts to a “heckler’s veto” over public information, where the potential for misuse by a few is used to justify denying access to all, including the judiciary. The duty of a state agency in a democracy is to counter misinformation with facts and to prosecute illegal misuse of data, not to eliminate the data itself. This reasoning shows a paternalistic and troubling distrust of the citizenry, the media, and the courts, assuming they are incapable of discerning context or truth.

The timing of this rationale is particularly telling. It follows the high-profile Chandigarh mayoral poll case, where CCTV footage was not misused for “malicious narratives” but was used by the Supreme Court itself to expose and rectify a blatant subversion of democracy. The most prominent recent use of such footage was to uphold the rule of law, not to spread misinformation. This context strongly suggests that the ECI’s stated fear of “malicious narratives” is a convenient cover for a more profound fear of “inconvenient truths” that objective video evidence can irrefutably reveal.

II. The Plenary Power of the ECI: A Shield for Democracy, Not a Sword Against It

At the heart of the ECI’s authority lies Article 324 of the Constitution, a provision that grants it vast and plenary powers to ensure the sanctity of the electoral process.

A. The “Reservoir of Power” under Article 324

Article 324(1) of the Constitution of India vests the “superintendence, direction and control” of the preparation of electoral rolls and the conduct of all elections in the Election Commission. The Supreme Court of India, in the landmark case of Mohinder Singh Gill v. Chief Election Commissioner, (1978) 1 SCC 405, provided the most authoritative interpretation of this clause. Justice V.R. Krishna Iyer, writing for the majority, famously described Article 324 as a “reservoir of power” for the ECI. The Court held that this provision endows the Commission with the necessary authority to address any contingency that may arise during an election for which the enacted laws—such as the Representation of the People Act, 1951 (RPA)—are silent. The core principle is that where the law has a vacuum, the ECI can step in with its plenary powers to ensure that the constitutional objective of a free and fair election is not frustrated.

In Anoop Baranwal v. Union of India, 2023 (6) SCC 1, the Supreme Court recommended an independent appointments committee, revealing a consistent concern with insulating the Commission from executive influence and preventing arbitrary action. The judiciary has consistently pushed for an ECI that is not only powerful but also independent, accountable, and non-arbitrary.

B. The Limits of Plenary Power: Subservience to Law and Fundamental Rights

The “reservoir of power” doctrine is not a license for unchecked authority. The Supreme Court has been equally clear about its limitations. The ECI’s power under Article 324 is fundamentally bound by two critical constraints:

1. Conformity with Existing Law: The plenary power operates only in areas “unoccupied by legislation”. Where Parliament has enacted a specific law governing a particular aspect of the electoral process, the ECI is bound to act in conformity with that law. It cannot issue directives that override, contradict, or frustrate the purpose and scheme of a validly enacted statute.
2. Adherence to the Constitution: The ECI, as a creature of the Constitution, must exercise its powers in a manner that is consistent with the Constitution’s fundamental tenets. Its actions cannot abrogate the fundamental rights guaranteed in Part III and must not damage the basic structure of the Constitution, of which free and fair elections, democracy, and the rule of law are indispensable components.

The directive to destroy CCTV footage after 45 days transgresses both these boundaries. It is a quintessential “colourable exercise of power”—an action that, while ostensibly within the ECI’s administrative domain, is in substance an encroachment upon the legislative field and an affront to constitutional principles. The Parliament has created a detailed statutory framework for the resolution of election disputes through the mechanism of an election petition, as laid out in Part VI of the RPA, 1951 (Sections 80-116C). Section 87 of the RPA explicitly states that the trial of an election petition shall be governed, as nearly as may be, by the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, and that the Indian Evidence Act, 1872, shall apply in all respects.

This statutory scheme presupposes the existence and availability of evidence. By mandating the destruction of the most direct, objective, and unimpeachable form of evidence—video footage—the ECI is not merely “managing” an internal process; it is actively sabotaging the efficacy of the judicial process prescribed by Parliament. It creates an evidentiary vacuum that directly frustrates the ability of a High Court to adjudicate an election petition on its merits. This is a clear inversion of the Mohinder Singh Gill doctrine. The ECI’s power was intended to be used remedially, to fill gaps in the law to ensure fairness. Here, it is being used to create a gap—an evidentiary black hole—that subverts fairness.

For example, what happens when an election petition gets filed on the 44^th day post the declaration of results and in the course of the proceedings, the Court orders the ECI to produce the camera recording of the election process. The Election Commission can simply say that it does not keep such data and get away with it.

Furthermore, the directive runs counter to the entire trajectory of judicial thinking on the ECI’s institutional integrity. The Supreme Court’s interventions, from commenting on the abolition of Election Commissioner posts in S.S. Dhanoa v. Union of India, 1991 (3) SCC 567, to mandating a new appointment process in Anoop Baranwal, have been aimed at strengthening the ECI’s independence and ensuring its decisions are judicious and not arbitrary. As the Court observed in  Dhanoa, when an institution is “accountable to none, it is politic to entrust its affairs to more hands than one. It helps to assure judiciousness and want of arbitrariness”. A unilateral executive fiat of this magnitude, which reverses long-standing policy and has far-reaching consequences for electoral justice without any public consultation, embodies the very kind of arbitrary executive action that the judiciary has consistently sought to curb. It is an exercise of power that prioritizes administrative convenience and opacity over the constitutional duty to uphold democratic accountability.

III. The Voter’s Right to Know: A Non-Negotiable Fundamental Right

The ECI’s directive to erase the visual record of an election is also a direct and frontal assault on a fundamental right that the Supreme Court has painstakingly carved out and fortified over two decades: the voter’s right to information. This right, derived from the guarantee of freedom of speech and expression under Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution, is the lifeblood of an informed electorate and the bedrock of a functioning democracy. The ECI’s policy of data destruction attempts to constrict this right, treating it as a limited, disposable privilege rather than the dynamic, non-negotiable right the Constitution guarantees.

A. The Evolution of the Right to Information under Article 19(1)(a)

The jurisprudential journey of the voter’s right to know began in earnest with the landmark judgment of the Supreme Court in Union of India v. Association for Democratic Reforms (ADR), (2002) 5 SCC 294. In this seminal case, the Court was faced with the question of whether voters had a right to know the background of the candidates seeking their votes. The Court’s answer was an emphatic affirmative. It ruled that the right to vote would be meaningless without access to information about the candidates. For a citizen to make an informed choice, which is the essence of participation in a democracy, they have a fundamental right under Article 19(1)(a) to be informed of the antecedents of candidates, including their criminal records, financial assets and liabilities, and educational qualifications. The Court reasoned that “misinformation or non-information of any kind will create an ‘uninformed citizenry which makes democracy a farce'”.

When Parliament attempted to dilute this judgment by passing an amendment to the RPA, the Supreme Court stood firm. In People’s Union for Civil Liberties (PUCL) v. Union of India, (2003) 4 SCC 399, the Court struck down the newly inserted Section 33B of the RPA, which sought to prevent candidates from having to disclose any information beyond what was statutorily required. The Court powerfully articulated that the voter’s right to information is not a static concept that can be capped or frozen by legislation. It declared this right to be dynamic, one that must be allowed to grow and evolve to meet the needs of a maturing democracy. This judgment established a crucial principle: the fundamental right to information in the electoral sphere cannot be curtailed by ordinary legislation or executive action.

B. From Candidate Information to Systemic Transparency: The Electoral Bonds Judgment

The scope of this fundamental right was dramatically expanded in the recent, constitutionally significant judgment in Association for Democratic Reforms v. Union of India (Electoral Bonds Case), 2024 INSC 113. Here, the Supreme Court extended the right to information beyond the individual candidate to the systemic issue of political party funding. In striking down the anonymous Electoral Bonds Scheme, the Court held that the secrecy of political funding violates the voter’s right to know under Article 19(1)(a).

The Court’s reasoning is directly applicable to the present issue. It held that “information about funding to a political party is essential for a voter to exercise their freedom to vote in an effective manner”. The logic is clear: to make a truly informed choice, a voter needs to know not just about the candidate, but also about the forces and finances that influence the political system. This principle of systemic transparency is paramount. The conduct of the election itself—whether it is free from malpractice, whether counting is accurate, whether strong rooms are secure—is a critical piece of systemic information.

C. The Directive’s Assault on the Right to Information

The ECI’s directive to destroy video footage is a modern-day analogue to the unconstitutional Section 33B that was struck down in the PUCL case. While Section 33B was a legislative attempt to block access to information, the ECI’s directive achieves the very same end through administrative means—by physically and permanently destroying the source of the information. It is an attempt to “freeze and stagnate” the right to information by rendering it unenforceable.

The ECI’s narrow, litigation-centric view—that the footage exists only for the purpose of an election petition and is useless after 45 days—is a constitutionally flawed perspective. The right to information serves a much broader purpose than merely facilitating litigation. It is essential for continuous public discourse, academic research, media scrutiny, and civil society advocacy for electoral reforms. By destroying the raw data of an election’s conduct, the ECI prevents any meaningful post-mortem analysis of the process, shields systemic flaws from public view, and stifles the very debates that strengthen democracy. This is a direct infringement of the collective right of the citizenry under Article 19(1)(a) to receive and impart information about the functioning of a core democratic institution.

The jurisprudence of the Supreme Court has consistently moved towards greater transparency. The ECI’s directive represents a stark and unconstitutional reversal of this trend.

The balancing act between the right to information and the right to privacy, which the Supreme Court meticulously performed in the Electoral Bonds case using a “double proportionality” test, is entirely absent in the ECI’s calculus. The Court acknowledged the privacy interests of donors but ultimately found that the public’s right to know was paramount for ensuring electoral integrity. In stark contrast, the ECI’s directive gives absolute and disproportionate primacy to a speculative privacy concern and a paternalistic fear of “misuse,” while completely extinguishing the concrete and judicially sanctified fundamental right to information.

IV. The Animus of Arbitrariness: The Directive’s Violation of Article 14

Beyond its infringement of the right to information, the ECI’s directive is constitutionally vulnerable for its inherent arbitrariness. Article 14 of the Constitution guarantees equality before the law and the equal protection of the laws. Over decades of interpretation, the Supreme Court has expanded this guarantee to serve as a formidable bulwark against arbitrary state action. Any executive or legislative act that is unreasonable, irrational, or capricious is liable to be struck down as violative of Article 14. The ECI’s data destruction mandate, when subjected to this test, reveals itself to be a textbook case of arbitrary executive action.

A. The Doctrine of Arbitrariness: Maneka Gandhi and its Progeny

The modern doctrine of arbitrariness was powerfully articulated by the Supreme Court in the landmark case of Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India, (1978) 1 SCC 248. In this case, the Court held that the “procedure established by law” under Article 21 must be “fair, just and reasonable,” not “fanciful, oppressive or arbitrary”. Crucially, the Court established the “golden triangle” principle, holding that Articles 14, 19, and 21 are not mutually exclusive silos but are deeply interlinked. An action that is arbitrary under Article 14 would fail the test of reasonableness under Article 21 and could also impose unreasonable restrictions under Article 19.

Following Maneka Gandhi, the Court in cases like EP Royappa v. State of Tamil Nadu, 1974 4 SCC 3 explicitly stated that “equality is antithetical to arbitrariness” and that Article 14 embodies a guarantee against any form of arbitrary state action. This means that every action of the state or its instrumentalities must be based on reason and must not be guided by extraneous or irrelevant considerations.

B. Applying the Arbitrariness Test to the ECI’s Directive

When the ECI’s directive is placed on the anvil of the arbitrariness test, it fails on multiple counts.

1. Lack of a Rational Nexus: For an action to be non-arbitrary, there must be a rational nexus between the objective it seeks to achieve and the means adopted to achieve it. The ECI’s stated primary objective is to prevent the misuse of footage on social media to create “malicious narratives”. The means adopted is the blanket destruction of all footage for all purposes after 45 days. There is no rational connection between these two. The policy is excessively broad; it uses a sledgehammer to crack a nut. To prevent potential misuse by a few “non-contestants,” it penalizes all legitimate stakeholders, including electoral candidates, the judiciary, researchers, and the general public. The proper response to misuse is targeted legal action against the miscreants under existing laws (such as the Indian Penal Code or the Information Technology Act), not the pre-emptive destruction of a public record.
2. Gross Disproportionality: The measure is also grossly disproportionate to the harm it purports to prevent. The speculative harm of a few “malicious narratives” on social media cannot justify the certain and irreversible harm of destroying an entire class of crucial evidence that is vital for upholding the integrity of the democratic process. As argued previously, less restrictive and more proportionate alternatives are readily available. These could include creating secure archives, allowing access only through a court order, or implementing a system of redaction to protect voter privacy while preserving evidence of official conduct. The ECI’s choice of the most extreme and destructive option available demonstrates a lack of application of mind and is, therefore, arbitrary.
3. The Unreasonableness of the 45-Day Timeline: The 45-day timeline is itself a product of arbitrary and unreasonable logic. The RPA, 1951, provides a 45-day limitation period to file an election petition. An election petition is a serious legal undertaking that requires a petitioner to plead “material facts” and “full particulars” of any corrupt practice (Section 83, RPA, 1951). Gathering sufficient prima facie evidence of malpractice across a constituency—which can have over a thousand polling stations—consulting with legal counsel, and drafting a legally sound petition is a formidable task. The ECI’s directive creates a perverse situation where the clock for the destruction of the best evidence runs concurrently with the clock for filing the petition. This makes it practically impossible for a petitioner to access and analyse this crucial evidence to build a credible case before the deadline expires. The directive, therefore, does not merely align with the limitation period; it weaponizes it, using it as a guillotine to sever the link between a legal challenge and the evidence needed to sustain it.

This policy is both procedurally and substantively arbitrary. It is procedurally arbitrary because it was enacted as a unilateral executive fiat, reversing a long-standing, reasoned policy without any apparent stakeholder consultation. It is substantively arbitrary because the policy itself, as demonstrated, is irrational, disproportionate, and serves no legitimate public purpose that could outweigh the immense damage it does to the principle of electoral transparency. The arbitrariness is not an unintended consequence; it appears to be a deliberate feature designed to create a system of de facto impunity for electoral malpractice. By making the burden of proof for an election petitioner nearly impossible to discharge, the directive structurally insulates electoral processes from effective judicial review, a result that is the very definition of an arbitrary state action that undermines the rule of law.

The critical importance of video evidence is not a matter of academic speculation; it has been vividly demonstrated in recent events. The Chandigarh mayoral poll case (2024) stands as a powerful testament to this fact. It was solely the “unimpeachable” evidence captured by CCTV cameras that allowed the Supreme Court to witness the Presiding Officer brazenly defacing ballot papers. This video evidence enabled the Court to intervene decisively, overturn the fraudulent result.

The directive also unfairly shifts the burden of proof in election petitions. By destroying the best evidence, the ECI forces petitioners to rely on weaker, circumstantial evidence and oral testimony, which is notoriously difficult to marshal and easy to discredit. The state, through its instrumentality, is actively destroying evidence that could corroborate a petitioner’s claim, making an already difficult legal burden nearly impossible to discharge. This fundamentally subverts the notion of a fair trial as envisaged under Section 87 of the RPA, 1951.

The inescapable question that arises is stark: How many Chandigarh-style frauds would go undetected, unproven, and unpunished under the ECI’s new data destruction regime? By removing the most effective tool for exposing malpractice, the directive does not curb “malicious narratives”; it ensures that the official narrative, however flawed, is the only one that survives.

V. Conclusion and Recommendations: Restoring the Light of Transparency

A synthesis of the arguments presented leads to an inexorable conclusion. The directive is a colourable exercise of the ECI’s plenary powers under Article 324, as it is used not to fill a legislative gap for the sake of fairness, but to create an evidentiary vacuum that frustrates the statutory scheme of electoral justice established by the Representation of the People Act, 1951. It is a direct violation of the voter’s fundamental right to information under Article 19(1)(a), a right painstakingly developed by the Supreme Court in a series of landmark judgments from ADR (2002) to the Electoral Bonds (2024) case, which collectively establish transparency as a non-negotiable pillar of Indian democracy. The directive fails the test of arbitrariness under Article 14, as it is an irrational and grossly disproportionate measure that serves no legitimate public purpose sufficient to justify the complete destruction of a vital class of public records.

This issue must be viewed not as a one-off administrative misstep, but as a symptom of a worrying institutional trend towards opacity. Built upon the flawed legislative foundation of the amended Rule 93(2)(a) of the Conduct of Election Rules, 1961, the directive is part of a broader pattern where transparency is treated as a liability to be managed rather than an asset to be cherished. In a democracy, the answer to the potential misuse of information can never be the elimination of information itself. The path to strengthening public trust lies in greater openness, not in enforced obscurity. To reverse this dangerous trend and restore the light of transparency to India’s electoral process, the following actions are imperative.

The ECI must initiate a transparent, inclusive, and consultative process involving all relevant stakeholders—including all recognized political parties, civil society organizations working on electoral reforms, legal experts, and former election commissioners—to formulate a new, comprehensive “Election Records Retention and Access Policy.” This new framework should be codified in the rules and must:

1. • Establish a significantly longer, tiered retention period for all electronic records, with a minimum retention of at least two years for general elections, aligning with international best practices and providing ample time for litigation and research.
   • Create a secure, modern, and auditable digital archival system for this data to ensure its long-term integrity and preservation.
   • Establish clear, fair, and reasonable protocols for providing access to this data for the purposes of litigation, academic research, and public scrutiny. These protocols should incorporate necessary safeguards for individual voter privacy, such as court-mediated access or redaction, without resorting to the extreme measure of blanket destruction.

Upholding the sanctity of the electoral process is the shared responsibility of all democratic institutions. The ECI can best fulfil its constitutional mandate not by drawing a curtain over its processes, but by embracing transparency as the ultimate guarantor of its integrity and the public’s trust.

(The author is part of the legal research team of the organisation)

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 post The Erased Record: A constitutional challenge to the election commission’s 45-day data destruction mandate appeared first on SabrangIndia.

While the Opposition “merely protests in press conferences”, news reports on Sunday, June 29 suggest that the ECI is riding roughshod over all concerns and going ahead anyway!

This article by an expert, associated with Vote for Democracy asks:

• Is this move not a flagrant breach of Election Law?
• Is it move not part of a nefarious design meant to deal a serious blow to our election system and the Universal Right to Franchise?

This article further demands:

Has CEC Gyaneshwar Kumar been appointed to:

• Utterly violate Clause 19 of the Representation of Peoples’ Act 1950 (hereinafter called RP ACT 1950)?
• To violate the RP ACT 1950 selectively against the poor, unlettered, homeless property-less, deprived citizenry?
• To also surreptitiously CAA 2019 & the dangerous NRC?

Does the CEC have the Constitutional Authority under Law:

• To define and judge the citizenship rights?
• To usurp the powers of the Parliament?

In June 24, in a sudden move just months before the forthcoming 2025 Bihar Vidhan Sabha Elections, the ECI under the present CEC has woken up to a special revision of electoral rolls, a process that has to be undertaken strictly in accordance with election law (Representation of People’s Act, 1951) and of course the Constitution.

This unilaterally announced and fundamentally flawed decision of the ECI must be seen in the context of a series of data denials of information to the opposition parties and the general public. Under Articles 324-326 of the Indian Constitution, all data preserved by the ECI is in good faith of the “people of India” and not under the control of a government then in power. The ECI has, in recent months undemocratically changed its own rules not to make available videography of polling booths post-closing time and has, been obdurately refusing to make available to the Opposition and public previous Electoral Roles (to enable detection of mass deletions and mass exclusions) in data which is in a readable and searchable format,

In this background of complete breakdown of trust and communication between the people themselves, Opposition parties and the ECI, the ECI issues this sudden diktat on June 24, 2025. Using a newly coined and specially designed term, ‘Special Intensive Revision’ of Electoral Rolls, vide its No. 23/ESR/2025 dated June 24, 2025—an exercise that finds no legitimacy in either Article 324 of the Constitution of India nor in the Representation of Peoples’ Act 1950, nor either in the Electors Registration Rules 1960.

With these usurped powers, the ECI has issued “instructions dated June 24, 2024, addressed to the Chief Electoral Officer Bihar, Patna directing therein the ‘Special Intensive Revision’ of Electoral Rolls, by July 26, 2025.” While claiming that the exercise has been necessitated because of “new demographic factors that have emerged in recent times”, the ECI’s decisions/actions do not find any objective basis.

The ECI has thereby directed the CEO Bihar to perform this self-appointed duty to decide as to whether each one of the voters is an Indian citizen or not, an exercise that the ECI with well delineated powers under the Constitution and the RPA-1950 is simply not authorised to do.

The ECI has further delegated this onerous task to the Block Level Officers (BLOs) who are, usually, Class 3 employees and cannot be authorised to decide on the citizenship of all the electors. No law empowers them to do so, especially those electors who have been registered to vote over several decades. Which means those voters who have enjoyed the constitutional right to universal adult franchise. As a result of this step, this scrutiny of Bihar voters who today touch 80 million –and increase from 77.26 million in the 2024 Lok Sabha (last June) —needs to be undertaken in just over a month!!! Will this process — hastily announced and compressed for completion in less than four weeks– moreover, one that has no basis in law or the Constitution be undertaken without the fundamental violation of Registration of Electors Rule 1960—since the legally mandate and mandatory time required for each step of this task has simply been overlooked, deliberately?

Enormity of the new task to be accomplished in one month

STATE WISE NUMBER OF ELECTORS – BIHAR

Source: https://www.eci.gov.in/general-election-to-loksabha-2024-statistical-reports

Under which Law does the ECI claims to draw the powers for such a draconian task?

The ECI in its directive letters No. 23/2025-ERS (Vol. II) dated June 24, 2025 (ibid) has claimed that it is empowered to do so under Article 324 of the Constitution of India and section 21 of the Representation of People, Act, 1950.

Let us examine the said provisions.

Article 324 in Constitution of India

324. Superintendence, direction and control of elections to be vested in an Election Commission

(1) The superintendence, direction and control of the preparation of the electoral rolls for, and the conduct of, all elections to Parliament and to the Legislature of every State and of elections to the offices of President and Vice-President held under this Constitution shall be vested in a Commission (referred to in this Constitution as the Election Commission).

The ECI has been empowered to, ‘The superintendence, direction and control of the preparation of the electoral rolls’, but not to decide as to whether one is a citizen of India or not.

This is because there is a separate Citizenship Act, 1955 and Indian Citizenship is decided as per provisions of Article 5 to 11 of the Constitution of India.

Article 11 reads as under: Parliament to regulate the Right of Citizenship by law.

Therefore, the June 24, “directives” of the Commission are unconstitutional and violative of the provisions of the articles related to Citizenship. Moreover, the ECI is unauthorisedly and illegally assuming the powers of Parliament, especially when it is seeking certain documentary evidence from any persons who are not included in the electoral roles of 2003 and are born before July 1, 1987 in as much as:

A person most deprived being homeless, unlettered, having no identity card, no land, no permanent residence certificate issued by Government, no passport, no pension payment order as he she does draw any service pension, issued before July 1, 1987 and who has not been included in the electors list earlier before 2003, either because the person is a minor, or because of the dereliction of duty by the ECI will be severely impacted.

In order to remove such arbitrariness, discrimination, favouritism, deprivation and chaos, keeping in view the actual conditions of the country provisions have been made under the RPA Act 1950 and The Registration of Electors Rules, 1960, to which we shall refer a little later.

First, the Clause 21 of the Representation of People’s Act, 1950:

The said Clause 21 reads as under:

[21. Preparation and revision of electoral rolls. — (1) The electoral roll for each constituency shall be prepared in the prescribed manner by reference to the qualifying date and shall come into force immediately upon its final publication in accordance with the rules made under this Act.

2[(2) the said electoral roll—

(a) shall, unless otherwise directed by the Election Commission for reasons to be recorded in writing, be revised in the prescribed manner by reference to the qualifying date—

As such in this clause 21 (1) one needs to concentrate on following mandate of the law to the ECI:

i) shall be prepared in the prescribed manner

ii) In accordance with the rules made under this Act.

ECI cannot and should not travel beyond the four walls by way of unauthorised outreach activities rather should concentrate on its sacred duty of conduction elections in a fair, transparent and absolutely impartial manner.

Consequently, it is clear that the instructions issued by the ECI, are patent violation of the provision of clause 21(1) as this intended action will nullify all the existing roles containing all electors that have been in effect –granting Universal Adult Franchise–in 2004, 2009, 2014, 2019 and the 2024 Lok Sabha elections apart from the elections to the Bihar state legislature during this long period of over two decades.

Further, this clause 21 of the RPA Act, 1950 is subordinate to the umbrella Clause 15 which reads as under:

15. Electoral roll for every constituency. —For every constituency there shall be an electoral roll which shall be prepared in accordance with the provisions of this Act under the superintendence, direction and control of the Election Commission.

Therefore, Clause 15 makes it patently clear that an electoral roll which shall be prepared in accordance with the provisions of this Act. Possibly deliberately and with mala fide intent, the ECI has failed or refused to note is that all provisions for the ‘preparation of electoral rolls’ are to be read together, not just Clause 21 selectively.

There is no denying the fact that the ECI is empowered to have the superintendence, direction and control of the Election Commission for preparation of the electoral rolls but it is of a great significance that the ECI is duty bound to accomplish the task in accordance with the provisions of this ACT 1950, nothing more, nothing less.

Let us now glance at the provisions of the Act, ibid wherein, under Clause 19, the conditions for the registration of an elector are codified which the ECI has miserably failed to observe/maintain.

The same are reproduced here as under:

4 [19. Conditions of registration. —Subject to the foregoing provisions of this Part, every person who —

(a) Is not less than [eighteen years] of age on the qualifying date, and

(b) is ordinarily resident in a constituency,

shall be entitled to be registered in the electoral roll for that constituency.]

It is crystal clear that there are only two conditions required for any person to get registered as an elector namely the person should be of 18 years or more and should be ordinarily residing in the constituency. Further it is the clear mandate given to the ECI and the inherent right of the person that the person shall be registered in the electoral rolls. From the above provisions it is obvious that the ECI has no right to demand the documents as enumerated in its order from each and every elector who is was not registered in 2003. Worse, merely owning a house or a property in an area does not make one an ordinarily residing citizen as defined under Clause 20 of the rules Ibid which is as under:

20. Meaning of “ordinarily resident”. —6[(1) A person shall not be deemed to be ordinarily resident in a constituency on the ground only that he owns, or is in possession of, a dwelling house therein.

(1A) A person absenting himself temporarily from his place of ordinary residence shall not by reason thereof cease to be ordinarily resident therein.

Parliament, the law-making body—legislature– has been conscious of the need to weed out the wrongly registered voters (electors) and the provision to address this malady is contained under Clause 16 of the RPA Act 1950 and the same is as under:

16. Disqualifications for registration in an electoral roll. — (1) A person shall be disqualified for registration in an electoral roll if he—

(a) is not a citizen of India; or

(b) is of unsound mind and stands so declared by a competent court; or

(c) is for the time being disqualified from voting under the provisions of any law relating to corrupt 1*** practices and other offences in connection with elections.

The ECI’s unconstitutional and bombastic claim that it will seek a certificate of birth under Sub-clause(a) of Clause 16 is preposterous. Will the ECI then also seek a certificate of being sound mind as provided under subclause (b)of the Clause ibid.

What do the Rules for registration prescribe for getting registered as an elector?

Under Rule 13(1) of the Registration of Electors Rules 1960, it is provided that a person has to submit an application in form No. 6. There is no distinction provided in Rule 13 (1) of the Rules between voters registered in 2003 or thereafter at any time. How can therefore the ECI make conditions that are contrary to this mandate?

The form also does not prescribe for the need to produce any certificates as has recently been announced by the ECI arbitrarily.

Under the 1960 Rules, there is a further provision that allows for correction in electoral roles—a person has to apply in form No. 8. To raise any objection for a wrongful or ‘fake’ inclusion of voters, an application has to be moved in Form No. 7. There is also a punishment prescribed for any false declaration made and hence the present architect newly framed by ECI smacks of a move uncalled for.

Time lines for the deletion of name as per instructions issued by the ECI vide No. 23/INST/2023-ERS Dated August 11, 2023

An Electoral Registration Officer (ERO) is not empowered to undertake this task, much less the BLO!

The Commission taking all aspects into consideration, including with a view to wrongful deletion during election year has directed that ERO shall not resort to a deletion without a form 7 and without following due process of verification as laid down in para 4 of the above said instructions. The due process of verification as laid down and prescribed in para 6 (ii) (iii) of the above instructions, is as under:

An application has to be submitted by an Objector on the prescribed form No. 7 for deletion of any name, supported by a declaration that the information filled therein is not false and a receipt is to be issued against the receipt of the application, there is a punitive clause for false entries as under:

Note. – Any person who makes a statement or declaration which is false and which he either knows or believes to be false or does not believe to be true, is punishable under section 31 of the Representation of the People Act, 1950 (43 of 1950)

1. The election authority has to serve a registered notice to the concerned elector by registered post and the receipt of the delivery of the notice is to be kept in record
2. The person served the notice is supposed to reply with in 15 days after the issuance of the notice.
3. If no reply is received then the election authority asks the BLO to conduct a visit to the spot and makes all the records of time and date of visit, the person visiting and the person and exact place visited, the enquiries conducted and submit it to the competent authority who thereafter on expiry of further 15 days issues orders for the deletion.

The ECI– in its own wisdom– has prescribed following documents for the ‘special intensive revision’, oblivious of the ground realities or despite being aware of the same.

• any identity card
• pension payment order,
• identity card or document issued in India by government before June 1, 1987
• birth certificate issued by the competent authority,
• passport,
• matriculation certificates,
• permanent residence certificate issued by competent state authority and
• any land or house allotment certificate by government, among others.

Ground realities 

1. To seek a birth certificate of a person born before 1987 and also of his parents is nothing but a move calculated for exclusion. This also smacks of an indirect move to bring in the controverted National Register of Citizens (NRC), under challenge in the Supreme Court. Basically, this is also contrary to the law of the land in as much as the registration of births and deaths Act came into existence only in 1969 as under:

“The Registration of Births and Deaths Act, 1969 (Act No. 18 of 1969) [31st May 1969] An Act to provide for the regulation of registration of births and deaths and for matters connected therewith”.

2. Those who are born before July 1, 1987 and were registered as voters after 2003 cannot be denied their right as Indian citizen by the ECI, without proceedings conducted as per law by the competent authority under the Citizenship Act, 1955, to decide the citizenship issue.

3. Civil registration of births and deaths until 2011 (when the last Census was conducted) were at only 82.4% and 66.4% respectively. How then can we imagine that every legitimate birth and death of both father and mother of those born on or before July 1, 1987 will have been recorded through a birth certificate?

4. Even after making birth registration mandatory in 2023, as on March 11,2025 still 10 % of Indian births go unregistered.

5. The National Family Health Survey-3 conducted from December 2005 to August 2006, shows only 6.3% birth registrations in Bihar, 7.3% in UP, 9.5% in Jharkhand and 16.4% in Rajasthan while the national figure for this was 41.4%, and birth certificates granted only for 27.1% of the population.

6. In 199, in India only 52.1% population was able to read and write, around half of the population is totally unlettered. The figures for Bihar show the literacy rate at only 38.48% and among females only 22.89%. To go further, in 2001 only 87,60,589 out of 8,29,98,509 persons i.e., a poor 55% of the people had passed their Std X examinations making the ECI’s demand of a matriculation certificate a cruel joke.

7. As of December 31, 2023, 6.5 percent (92,624,661) of Indian citizens possessed a valid passport; now CEC Mr. Gyaneshwar is on to deny them their voting rights on grounds of not having a passport!

8. Between 2019 to 2023 the total number of passports issued in Bihar are 20,12,357, that is catering to around 1.5% population. (Parbhat Khabar digital Bihar May 17, 2025 6.05am)

9. 4% population does not possess own houses per 2011 census, but Mr. Gyaneshwar wants them to show papers of own house otherwise lose electoral rights.

10. gov.in › images › AADHAAR_NUMBERS_ENGLISHGOVERNMENT OF INDIA MINISTRY OF ELECTRONICS AND INFORMATION …As per RGI data, the total projected population (2022) of India is 137.30 crore (approx.). As on June 30, 2022, a total of 133.586 crore Aadhaar cards have been generated. Around 4 crores of Indians have not got even an Aadhaar card.

Under these circumstances, one wonders as to why- instead of using the scant available resources for conducting a fair impartial and transparent just elections in the state of Bihar, the ECI is undertaking an unlawful and unconstitutional electoral revision exercise, hell bent in punishing the poor and hapless who enjoys one right above all, the right to universal adult franchise.

(The author, one of the experts associated with Vote for Democracy is also Former Dean, Faculty of Medical Sciences, Panjab University, Chandigarh)

Related:

Who orchestrated APPs failures, the FM and her ex-FS or the ECI?

SABRANGINDIA EXCLUSIVE: Election 2024, ECI: Technical glitch, gross negligence or deliberate manipulation?

The post Bihar: Sinister move by ECI as ‘intensive’ revision of electoral roles set to exclude vast majority of legitimate voters appeared first on SabrangIndia.

These are some of the sharp posers that arose out of a recent National Consultation that has resulted in this detailed Memorandum to the Election Commission of India (ECI) on April 11. The memorandum has been served by a Collective of Concerned Citizens, Technical Experts, and people’s/civil society organisations, outlining serious concerns on the Commission’s continued silence and inaction on grave concerns surrounding the transparency and integrity of India’s electoral process. The memorandum follows an earlier notice served in July 2024 and reiterates Six Urgent Demands to restore public confidence in the electoral system.

The Six Demands in the memorandum to restore public confidence in the electoral system are:

1. Public, searchable voter rolls: Make all past and present voters’ lists, with detailed additions and deletions, available in a searchable format on the ECI website to enable public verification.
2. Form 17C Transparency: Upload all Form 17C data (record of votes polled) from each booth and constituency, along with aggregate vote counts, in a searchable database for public scrutiny.
3. Access to Voter List Revision forms: Release Forms 9, 10, 11, 11A, and 11B, which contain data on voter roll revisions (additions and deletions), in a searchable database, in a transparent and accessible format.
4. Open the EVM source code: Make the EVM source code open source and publicly inspectable to enable independent verification of software integrity across all machines.
5. Full disclosure of SLU contents: Allow public inspection and upload the complete contents of each Symbol Loading Unit used in elections, with access/monitoring and oversight from independent technical experts.
6. Restore paper ballot verifiability: Modify the VVPAT process to allow the slip to be handed to the voter for manual deposit into a separate ballot box, followed by 100% counting of these slips. Final vote counts must be based solely on these physical paper records.

The copy of the memorandum may be accessed here.

The group of citizens and organisations, coordinated through Vote for Democracy (VFD), has also questioned the ECI’s growing proximity to the political executive, its failure and reluctance to observe the sanctity of the Model Code of Conduct (MCC) and curb divisive speech and overall, the erosion of its independence. The signatories to the memorandum have underscored that the current semi-automated, disjointed architecture of the EVS, comprising over 10.5 lakh standalone voting machines, makes it vulnerable to both human error and political manipulation. The absence of basic audit trails, like verified 17C forms or consistent VVPAT tallies, undermines electoral legitimacy.

Does not India have a clumsy, semi-automated, Electronic Voting System (EVS) riddled with technical vulnerabilities that needs urgent change/redressal?

This memorandum has been endorsed by 83 prominent individuals from across the country, including computer scientists, technology experts, former judges and civil servants, journalists, and grassroots activists, all unified in their demand for electoral integrity. Among the signatories are MG Devasahayam (former IAS and Army officer), Madhav Deshpande (Computer Scientist and Expert), Professor Harish Karnick (Computer Science Expert) Justice D. Hariparanthaman and Justice B.G. Kolse Patil (Former High Court Judges), Aruna Roy  (Mazdoor Kisan Shakti Sangathan), Dr Sunilam (President, Kisan Sangharsh Samiti & Ex MLA (MULTAI) Madhya Pradesh), Prafulla Samantara, (President, Lok Shakti Abhiyan- People’s Forum for Protection of Democratic Rights and Natural Resources), Tara Rao (Edelu Karnataka) Venkatesh Nayak (CHRI), Anjali Bhardwaj,  E.A.S. Sarma IAS (Retd), Prashant Tandon (Senior Journalist & Political Commentator) Teesta Setalvad, (Senior Journalist and Writer), Raju Parulekar (Writer & Political Commentator) among others. Their collective expertise spans election law, public policy, data systems, and human rights, adding both credibility and urgency to the six demands outlined. Their intervention reflects a growing national concern over the erosion of electoral transparency and the critical need for systemic reform.

Among the critical points raised in the memorandum are: A complete lack of transparency and absence of independent monitoring of the Symbol Loading Units (SLUs),

• Failure to release key electoral data such as Form 17C and VVPAT records,
• Inaccessibility of updated, searchable voter rolls to the general public, and
• Refusal to subject the EVM source code to public scrutiny.

Referring to international best practices and findings from the Citizens Commission on Elections, the memorandum stresses that unless voting technology is open to independent auditing and verification, the Indian electorate’s faith in free and fair elections will continue to deteriorate. The signatories have urged the Election Commission of India to engage in meaningful dialogue with citizens, technical experts, and political representatives to address these longstanding concerns. The six demands outlined are not only feasible but essential to restoring faith in India’s electoral integrity. A refusal to act on these fronts would signal a continued disregard for democratic accountability and further erode public trust in the electoral process. The time for transparency is now.

The National Campaign for Accountability of the Electoral Process

# After a three-hour long consultation held recently a representation has been sent to Election Commission with six key demands emerged during discussions within civil society groups, dozens of civil society groups, public intellectuals including former bureaucrats and professionals have come together to launch a nationwide campaign for a fair electoral process and an accountable Election Commission.

# Participants n consultation felt the need for a greater overhaul of the electoral system and the campaign will cover all aspects of conduct of elections including EVMs, unfair execution of Model Code, how level play field is disturbed elections after elections.

# A national chorus for replacing EVMs with ballot paper is getting louder. The campaign has taken note of this will create a consensus for this among stake holders and electorate.

# Soon after Lok Sabha election serious doubts have been raised about the credibility of electoral process which after Haryana, Maharashtra and Delhi assembly elections got further amplified.

# Sanctity of electoral roll is a big cause of concern. How 37 lakh new voters have been added just in 5 months before Maharashtra elections with no satisfactory explanation by EC indicates the scale of malpractices. Similar instances of addition and deletion of large-scale electorates have been reported in Haryana, Delhi, West Bengal and many other states.

Given this situation, a detailed national campaign on the lines outlined above will soon be launched.

Related

Calcutta High Court slams ECI for inaction, restrains BJP from publishing ads in any form of media

M’tra: Is the protest against ‘EVM system’ and irregular electoral practices is gaining momentum?

Is India’s unique experiment on people’s democracy with the right to universal franchise being lampooned by a compliant Election Commission?

Congress alleges anomalous voter turnout surge in Maharashtra Assembly Elections 2024 in memorandum submitted to ECI

The post Memo to ECI: Make Voter’s Form 17Cs list accessible on Commission website, clean up existing, technologically messy EVS structure, say citizens appeared first on SabrangIndia.

On March 2, the Election Commission of India (ECI) issued a rather vague statement, admitting to the fact that duplicate EPIC numbers have been issued but stating that this duplication is because of manual de-centralisation and does not necessarily mean any fraudulent or duplicate voter inclusion!  The ECI also said that, while it is true that some electors have the same EPIC number, other important details, such as demographic information, Assembly Constituency, and polling booth, differ for these electors.

Incidentally the Election Commission’s own Handbook states that duplicate EPIC numbers cannot be given and the responsibility for the same lies with the ECI.

The TMC’s documented allegations on duplicated EPIC card numbers granted to voters have lent substance to the possibility that spurious injections of votes could take place, voters who are not legitimate voters in a particular constituency can be allowed to vote there.

The controversy surrounding EPIC number duplication has escalated with allegations and strongest move over the allegation of voter manipulation against the Election Commission from West Bengal Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee, who has accused the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) of colluding with the Election Commission to manipulate the voter list for the upcoming 2026 West Bengal Assembly elections. The allegations were first made on February 27 and reiterated after March 2, with a delegation of TMC MPs visiting the ECI with documentation to substantiate the claim.

Unable to in anyway now disregard the mounting allegations by the TMC related to forthcoming West Bengal assembly elections in 2026, almost a fortnight later, the Election Commission has finally called on all national and state political parties to submit their suggestions by April 30 in order to address any unresolved electoral issues. These concerns are to be reviewed at various levels, including those of Electoral Registration Officers (ERO), District Election Officers (DEO), and Chief Electoral Officers (CEO), reported by the TOI.

The request was made as part of ongoing efforts by opposition parties and leaders, first INC and AAP, now TMC, demanding the integrity and accuracy of voter rolls and electoral processes.

Earlier the Indian National Congress (INC) and the Aam Admi Party (AAP) had raised concerns of mass increases and deletions from voter’s lists related to the Maharashtra assembly elections (2024) and the Delhi state elections (2025). While the INC made these complaints only after the polls, AAP had also made them prior to the state elections in February.

Mamata Banerjee accuses BJP of manipulating voter lists ahead of Bengal elections

On February 27, 2025, West Bengal Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee addressed a gathering of Trinamool Congress (TMC) workers at the Netaji Indoor Stadium in Kolkata, asserted that the BJP, in collusion with the Election Commission, had been adding fake voters to the rolls in these states. She stated that her party had caught the discrepancies that the opposition parties had failed to notice in Maharashtra and Delhi. The TMC leader claimed that the BJP was now targeting Bengal with similar tactics, vowing that the state would not be another conquest on the BJP’s electoral map. Mamta Banerjee’s allegations were substantiated with documentation that led to a “clarification” by the ECI on March 2.

Mamta said that, “BJP would be gravely mistaken if they think Bengal is just another stop on their conquest map, another Gujarat, Madhya Pradesh, or Uttar Pradesh to subjugate. Bengal has never bowed. Bengal has never surrendered. And in 2026, Bengal will rise once again to remind Delhi that our soil is not up for grabs, our identity is not theirs to rewrite. Ahead of 2026 Assembly Elections, fake voters are being smuggled into electoral rolls. But no amount of electoral fraud, no puppet Election Commission, no misuse of central agencies will alter Bengal’s destiny. I call upon my brave soldiers of Trinamool Congress to stay vigilant. A special committee has been set up to monitor every move. If BJP thinks they can steal Bengal, they are in for the fight of their lives.”

এই শিকল পরা ছল মোদের, এ শিকল-পরা ছল।
এই শিকল পরেই শিকল তোদের করব রে বিকল॥

BJP would be gravely mistaken if they think Bengal is just another stop on their conquest map, another Gujarat, Madhya Pradesh, or Uttar Pradesh to subjugate. Bengal has never bowed. Bengal has never… pic.twitter.com/kEAYAEn2KT

— Mamata Banerjee (@MamataOfficial) February 27, 2025

“This election is a call to arms to protect our culture, our identity, and our unity. It is a battle to uphold the constitutional values that define us, to send a resounding message to Delhi: divisive forces will find no ground in Bengal. Bengal has never bowed to external forces seeking to dictate its destiny. This soil of great martyrs and revolutionaries will deliver a fitting response to the BJP” she added

Banerjee also issued a direct challenge to the BJP, declaring that Bengal would decisively reject their influence, saying, “After Maharashtra and Delhi, now you are targeting Bengal. We will give you a befitting reply. Once again ‘khela hobe’. I am asking party workers to hit the ball harder this time.” She concluded that the TMC’s goal of winning over 215 seats and pushing the BJP’s numbers down.

Setting the stage for the 2026 Assembly elections, Mamata urged her party to secure more than 215 seats in the 294-member West Bengal Assembly. Banerjee warned that the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) was attempting to manipulate the voter lists with the help of the Election Commission, mirroring alleged tactics used in Maharashtra and Delhi.

Allegations of duplicate EPIC numbers and fake voters in Bengal

Banerjee took the opportunity to display a list she claimed contained names of fake voters in electoral rolls. According to her, these voters, some from out of state, were fraudulently added to Bengal’s electoral roll. She cited examples of names from states like Haryana and Gujarat, which appeared alongside the names of Bengal residents, all with identical EPIC numbers. Banerjee’s allegations were focused on the claim that these fake voters were being added to the rolls online, further fueling concerns about the integrity of the electoral process, reported The Indian Express

She also made an aggressive accusation against the Election Commission, alleging that it had become complicit in the BJP’s efforts to manipulate the voter list. This led Banerjee to issue a stern warning that if corrective actions were not taken, her party would take to the streets to demand accountability from the Election Commission.

Questions over the functioning of Election Commission

During her address, Banerjee accused the Election Commission of being influenced by the BJP, specifically calling out the new Chief Election Commissioner, Gyanesh Kumar. She pointed out that Kumar had previously held a position as a secretary in the cooperation department under Union Home Minister Amit Shah, suggesting a potential conflict of interest. Banerjee’s comments highlighted growing distrust in the impartiality of the Election Commission as ECI is under the watch of opposition parties since Lok Sabha Election 2024

In a bold declaration, Banerjee warned that if the Election Commission failed to act, her party would resort to extreme measures, including staging a prolonged protest. She reminded the gathering of her history of activism, referencing her 26-day hunger strike during the anti-land acquisition movement in 2006. Banerjee asserted that TMC was fully prepared to launch a movement against the Election Commission to restore fairness to the electoral process, should the need arise. She said:

“If I could go on a 26-day hunger strike during the anti-land acquisition movement in 2006, don’t forget we can also launch a movement against the Election Commission, forcing them to restore democracy. If required, we will protest indefinitely in front of the EC office to demand the removal of fake names from the voter roll” reported The Indian Express.

TMC’s allegations: duplicate EPIC numbers in Bengal

The TMC’s allegations of voter list manipulation has been based on their own review that the same EPIC numbers have been assigned to multiple electors in different regions, which they argue compromises the integrity of the electoral roll. Mamata Banerjee, speaking to party workers in Kolkata, stressed that the verification of the voter list should be a priority to prevent the insertion of fake voters. She claimed that the BJP, with the Election Commission’s tacit support, was attempting to manipulate the voter rolls in Bengal, just as they had allegedly done in Maharashtra and Delhi.

Banerjee’s accusations were compounded by the assertion that non-residents were being brought into Bengal to vote under false pretences using duplicate EPIC numbers. The TMC doubled down on these claims in subsequent statements, calling for an immediate and thorough examination of the voter lists in Bengal.

The Election Commission’s response: EPIC numbers and voter identity

In response to the allegations, the Election Commission on March 2, (Sunday) clarified that while some electors have identical EPIC numbers, this does not imply any fraudulent or duplicate voter registrations.

ECI said that, while it is true that some electors have the same EPIC number, other important details, such as demographic information, Assembly Constituency, and polling booth, differ for these electors. As such, individuals with identical EPIC numbers cannot vote outside of their designated polling station within their respective State or Union Territory (UT), where they are officially enrolled in the electoral roll.

Over the allegations surfaced on social media posts and media reporting over the duplicate EPIC numbers, ECI replied that, “The Election Commission has taken cognizance of certain social media posts and media reports flagging the issue of electors of two different states having identical EPIC numbers. In this regard, it is clarified that while EPIC numbers of some of the electors may be identical, the other details including demographic details, Assembly Constituency and polling booth are different for the electors with the same EPIC number. Irrespective of the EPIC number, any elector can cast a vote only at their designated polling station in their respective Constituency in their State/UT where they are enrolled in the electoral roll and nowhere else.”

ECI further added that, “the allotment of identical EPIC number/series to some electors from different States/UTs was due to a decentralized and manual mechanism being followed prior to shifting of the electoral roll database of all States/UTs to the ERONET platform. This resulted in certain State/UT CEO offices using the same EPIC alphanumeric series and leaving a scope for the possibility of duplicate EPIC numbers being allotted to electors in different Assembly Constituencies in different States/UTs.”

ECI’s Press Note dated March 2, 2025

The ECI also said that any cases of duplicate EPIC numbers would be rectified, with affected electors receiving a new unique EPIC number. Additionally, the ERONET 2.0 platform will be updated to facilitate and support this process.

ECI has now transformed into the BJP’s “roll-rigging department: TMC

In response to the ECI’s press statement on the issue, the TMC issued an official statement criticising the ECI’s handling of the matter. The party wrote on its X handle that the once-neutral ECI has now transformed into the BJP’s “roll-rigging department.” TMC further stated, “Election fraud of EPIC proportions! Smt. @MamataOfficial warned how  @BJP4India was hijacking democracy, and now @ECISVEEP ’s own admission proves her right. Duplicate EPIC numbers across states?”

Election fraud of EPIC proportions! Smt. @MamataOfficial warned how @BJP4India was hijacking democracy, and now @ECISVEEP’s own admission proves her right.

Duplicate EPIC numbers across states? A ‘manual error’ or a meticulously crafted scam to rig elections? They manipulated… pic.twitter.com/IjN2aE9y7G

— All India Trinamool Congress (@AITCofficial) March 2, 2025

TMC Rajya Sabha MP and former journalist Sagarika Ghose expressed her dissatisfaction with the Election Commission’s response, labelling it as “unsatisfactory response” and describing the issue of duplicate EPIC numbers as a scandal. She took to X (formerly Twitter) to write that, “duplicate EPIC cards are a shocking SCANDAL. Totally unsatisfactory response from @ECISVEEP. A full, fair and time bound investigation of electoral rolls must be done NOW. Free and fair elections are the core of democracy!”

Duplicate EPIC cards are a shocking SCANDAL. Totally unsatisfactory response from @ECISVEEP . A full, fair and time bound investigation of electoral rolls must be done NOW. Free and fair elections are the core of democracy! https://t.co/g2CexIlxuA

— Sagarika Ghose (@sagarikaghose) March 2, 2025

“A ‘manual error’ or a meticulously crafted scam to rig elections? They manipulated voter rolls in Maharashtra & Delhi and got away with it. They tried the same in Bengal but got caught. The ‘neutral’ ECI has turned into BJP’s poll-rigging department. Democracy is not a Modi-made product that can be tampered, tweaked, and sold off. WE WON’T LET YOU STEAL ELECTIONS!” Ghose questioned on her X post.

TMC’s 24 hours deadline to ECI, must accept error in 24 hours

On March 3, 2025, the Trinamool Congress voiced strong dissatisfaction with the Election Commission’s March 3 response to their concerns about duplicate EPIC numbers in the voter rolls. The party criticized the ECI for failing to properly address the issue and warned that if the Election Commission did not formally acknowledge the error within 24 hours, they would present additional evidence on March 4. During a press conference, TMC Rajya Sabha MP Sagrika Ghose, TMC leader Derek O’Brien, and Kirti Azad elaborated on the alleged scam surrounding the issuance of duplicate voter EPIC cards. They demanded immediate action from the Election Commission, insisting that the integrity of the electoral process must be safeguarded.

Rejecting the Election Commission’s clarification on the issue of duplicate voter identity cards, the Trinamool Congress said that while the ECI had acknowledged the error, it had not yet accepted responsibility for it. The party promised to present further evidence within the next 24 hours.

However, Trinamool leader Derek O’Brien clarified that this is not a threat but giving the respected ECI time to accept their error. He said that, “ECI is admitting the error but not accepting the error. In the next 24 hours, ECI must accept the error. If you do not do this, we will share another document tomorrow at 9 am. This is not a threat. It is giving the respected Election Commission of India time to accept their error,”

ECI’s Handbook says EPIC numbers cannot be duplicated

On March 4, TMC intensified its allegations of “ghost voters” in West Bengal, citing the Election Commission’s “Handbook for Electoral Registration Officers, 2012”, which states that EPIC numbers cannot be duplicated.

TMC said that the rebuttal issued by the party was based on the ECI’s own “Handbook for Electoral Registration Officers” published in the year 2012. As per the handbook, “same” photograph would come for all electors who have the same EPIC numbers”. [Para No. 14 of Chapter IX – Electoral Photo Identity Card (EPIC)]

A day earlier, TMC accused the Commission of a “scam” in issuing duplicate voter IDs and gave them a 24-hour deadline to “acknowledge the mistake.” The party claims that individuals from other states were registered under the same EPIC numbers as legitimate West Bengal voters, with Mamata Banerjee dubbing them “ghost voters.”

What are EPIC numbers?

EPIC numbers, first introduced in 1993 under the Registration of Electors Rules, 1960, serve as identity documents to prevent voter impersonation.

Notably, the EPIC numbers are a crucial part of the electoral process, as they help identify voters and ensure the integrity of elections. However, as per the EC’s Manual on Electoral Rolls, 2023, each EPIC is supposed to have a unique number, which includes a Functional Unique Serial Number (FUSN) for every Assembly constituency. With the advent of the ERONET platform in 2017, the process of issuing EPIC numbers has been streamlined. The manual states that a unique EPIC number is issued for the first-time voter, and any replacement EPIC retains the original number, further ensuring consistency in voter identity.

TMC’s 10-member delegation met Election Commission over ‘fake voter’ issue

On March 11, a 10-member TMC delegation, including prominent MPs such as Derek O’Brien and Kalyan Banerjee, met with the Election Commission in New Delhi. The delegation presented evidence of what they claimed to be fake voters found in various districts of West Bengal.

The All India Trinamool Congress (AITC) delegation, which included MPs Derek O’Brien, Kalyan Banerjee, Dr. Kakoli Ghosh Dastidar, Sagarika Ghose, Kirti Azad, Sajda Ahmed, and others, addressed the issues of duplicate EPIC numbers and discrepancies in the voter list of West Bengal during the meeting with the Election Commission, reported The Hindu.

In their memorandum to the ECI, raised concerns with the ECI regarding the issue, flagging the serious allegations of duplicate EPICs. The party posted on its X handle that, “the EPIC number duplication SCAM is the BIGGEST ELECTORAL FRAUD of our times, and the  @ECISVEEP has a lot to answer for! A 10-member delegation of our MPs met the CEC demanding:

Why was this buried for years until Smt. @MamataOfficial exposed it?

How can ECI “fix” it in 3 months when no action was taken for years?

How many duplicate EPICs exist, and in which states?

Will voters with duplicate EPICs be disenfranchised?

How is Aadhaar cloning impacting voter registration and electoral rolls?”

The EPIC number duplication SCAM is the BIGGEST ELECTORAL FRAUD of our times, and the @ECISVEEP has a lot to answer for!

A 10-member delegation of our MPs met the CEC demanding:
Why was this buried for years until Smt. @MamataOfficial exposed it?
How can ECI “fix” it in 3… pic.twitter.com/4nDJDQvopZ

— All India Trinamool Congress (@AITCofficial) March 11, 2025

Earlier, on March 6, a TMC delegation had met with the Chief Electoral Officer to address the alleged discrepancies in the state’s voter list. The delegation, which included West Bengal State President Subrata Bakshi and legislators Firhad Hakim, Chandrima Bhattacharya, Aroop Biswas, and Ritabrata Banerjee, had engaged in discussions with the Chief Electoral Officer regarding the reported irregularities in the state’s electoral rolls.

All concerns would be resolved: ECI to TMC delegation over EPIC number

On March 11, the Election Commission met with the TMC delegation and assured that all concerns, including duplicate EPIC numbers, duplicate, shifted, and deceased voters, as well as illegal migrants, would be addressed by each Booth Level Officer and the concerned Electoral Registration Officer. The apex poll body further stated in a post on X that this process would involve the active participation of Booth Level Agents appointed by all political parties.

Link:

ECI welcomed the delegation of @AITCofficial today.

The Commission mentioned that all concerns including duplicate EPIC numbers, duplicate, shifted & dead voters &illegal migrants will be resolved by each Booth Level Officer & concerned Electoral Registration Officer..

1/2

— Election Commission of India (@ECISVEEP) March 11, 2025

However, after the delegation met with the Election Commission, TMC MP Sagarika Ghose stated, “The issue of duplicate EPIC cards is extremely serious… All opposition parties have recognized it ever since West Bengal Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee flagged the issue… Ever since we have provided solid evidence of duplicate EPIC cards, the Election Commission is still not telling us how many duplicate EPIC cards are there… We have given some suggestions on how electoral rolls can be cleaned up… If there are any changes in the electoral roll, the Election Commission should bring out a separate roll and mention where the deletions and changes have been made”

Link:

#WATCH | Delhi: After the TMC delegation’s visit to the Election Commission office, TMC MP Sagarika Ghose says, “The issue of duplicate EPIC cards is extremely serious…All opposition parties have recognized it ever since West Bengal Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee flagged the… pic.twitter.com/6yyxvlylCN

— ANI (@ANI) March 11, 2025

“We have already provided solid evidence on duplicate EPIC cards. There is credible evidence that Aadhaar cards are being cloned and they are being used for fake voter registration… How will the Election Commission ensure that the cloning of the Aadhaar card will not affect the EPIC card? Transparency and rigorous investigation is necessary. Stonewalling will not work. The Election Commission has to walk the talk because electoral rolls are central to a free and fair poll” Ghosh added

Related:

BJP Ads Ban Row: SC refused to interfere with HC order restraining BJP from derogatory ads against TMC

Calcutta High Court slams ECI for inaction, restrains BJP from publishing ads in any form of media

SEC M’tra agrees to make weekly reports to CEC public, assures action on hate speech, urges every citizen to become alert voter: Vote For Democracy Delegation

The post After strong allegations by the TMC that ECI has transformed into the BJP’s “roll-rigging department”: TMC, ECI invites all parties for ‘deliberations’ appeared first on SabrangIndia.

Dhirendra K. Jha’s new book, “Golwalkar: The Myth behind the Man, The Man behind the Machine” says this: “Golwalkar’s promise of denying Muslims citizens’ rights is being lived out, from the legislature to the rhythms of their daily lives. Politically, they have been virtually invisibilised… All this enjoys such widespread approval in the Sangh Parivar because it corresponds to Golwalkar’s ideas and the historical destiny he set out for the RSS—to convert India into a Hindu Rashtra….” [1]

Then comes the commentary on Golwalkar’s book “Bunch of Thoughts”:

“…A fact that stands out is that the idea of ONOE closely resembles the vision of Madhav Sadashiv Rao Golwalkar, the second chief of the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS). Golwalkar was a strong advocate for a country with a unitary form of government…. In his famous 1966 book Bunch of Thoughts–which is considered as the bible of the RSS–Golwalkar, who at the time was the sarsanghchalak of the RSS, had lambasted the federal structure of India, with the word “One Nation” figuring multiple times in the book.” [2]

Now, note this latest on ONOE: “Former Chief Justice of India (CJI) UU Lalit told a joint parliamentary committee that he supported the larger plan of simultaneous elections but added that it cannot be rolled out in one go and would require several phases, according to people aware of the matter.” [3] He pointed out that any “substantive curtailment” of the tenure of the state assemblies—one of the steps suggested by a high-level committee led by former President Ram Nath Kovind—can lead to justifiable legal challenges over violation of the Constitution’s basic structure doctrine.

These developments come close on the heels of the (once again) arbitrary appointment of a Chief Election Commissioner (CEC) –Gyanesh Kumar–who has reportedly worked closely with the Union Home Minister.[4] To facilitate these moves, his illustrious predecessor has successfully weaponised India’s Election System (IES) and has now retired to the Himalayas to ‘detoxify’ himself![5] Recent moves by the Modi regime –ignoring a November 2023 judgement of the Supreme Court[6] — have brought the appointment of Election Commissioners totally under the purview of the political executive and government of the day. In 2023, post the passage of the five member judgement, the Union Government hastily enacted a law in contravention of the Court’s conclusions. [7]These moves have destroyed whatever was left of the independence and integrity of the ECI.

It is the constitutional right of universal adult franchise, guaranteed under Article 326 of the Constitution of India that grants the right to vote to all adult citizens, irrespective of their caste, creed or religion. It is this right that makes the minority communities at par with the majority and the depressed castes equal to privileged castes. The recently weaponised IES however, threatens this constitutional core by making possible large-scale spurious injection of votes through questionable, non-transparent practices on the one hand and deletion/exclusion of targeted sections of voters on the others. This has lead and is leading to the stealing of a genuine people’s mandate. If unchecked at this stage, this could render the right to universal adult franchise meaningless!

The EVM-centred IES has four critical components. Microchips to record the votes as cast by the voter, Voter Verifiable Paper Audit Trail (VVPATs) to audit and verify that the votes are counted as recorded and Symbol Loading Units (SLUs) that upload the name and symbol of the candidates contesting on a particular seat on VVPAT or paper trail machines roughly 10-15 days before. The fact that post 2017, the EVS (electronic voting system) is no more stand-alone but linked to the internet with the SLU having a labile memory has made the system susceptible to manipulation/meddling. The fourth critical component in the IES is Electoral Roll which is the voter’s list.

The integrity of the microchips in the SLU is suspect because only a select few from the ECI, government and directors on the board of public sector undertakings BEL and ECIL—found to have links  with the ruling Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) know about their design and source. [8] According to technical experts, the EVM contains multiple labile memories that records each vote as it is cast. The system also has the key to candidate mapping in the labile memory since this varies in each constituency and is needed to print the contents of each VVPAT slip.[9] The presence of labile memory implies that those values can be manipulated if access is available in any manner, externally. Some manipulations may not leave any trace and will not be visible in a forensic investigation. What is worse, SLUs are not subject to any security protocol! The SLU is not, after or before election stored in the strong-room.

While hearing a petition by the Association for Democratic Reforms (ADR), on whose plea the court had given its April 2024 order to verify the microchips in 5% of EVMs in an Assembly constituency, the Supreme Court asked the ECI to ensure that no data is deleted from the EVMs. After the court order in April 2024, the ECI came out with its SOP for checking and verification in July 2024 which states that a mock poll of up to 1,400 votes per machine will be conducted and the result tallied with the VVPAT slips ( If the results match, the machines would be considered to have passed the test.) ADR has argued that the SOP does not provide for actual verification of the microchips installed in the EVMs and VVPATs. [10]The entire thing appears to be a farce and ECI appears determined on protecting the microchips that seems to have been compromised!

To make the EVM system auditable and voter-verifiable, Supreme Court had, in 2013, ordered introduction of VVPAs. But in defiance of this order of the Supreme Court, the ECI, in February 2018 directed State Chief Electoral Officers to mandatorily verify VVPAT slips in only one randomly selected polling station in each assembly constituency.[11] This abysmally low 0.3% sample size defeated the very object of installing VVPATs in all EVMs which is also tantamount to a non-implementation of Supreme Court Order. Inexplicably and unfortunately, the ECI, through bluff and bluster has succeeded in obfuscating this core issue since, in subsequent hearings before the same court.

According to experts, this deliberate denial of verifiability and auditability has facilitated spurious injection of votes in various constituencies by the hiking of vote percentages in all phases of polling. There are astounding mismatches/spikes (7 to 12%) between the figures of votes polled and made available immediately after polls and before counting in the 2024 Lok Sabha as well as to the state assemblies of Haryana and Maharashtra which have become the subject of raging controversy. This, coupled with the failure of the ECI to provide 17-C forms -the ultimate arbiter/proof of votes polled–to all candidates/their agents and also to make these public, have triggered the suspicion of ‘stealing of mandate’, an allegation that has gained wide currency. 

Another layer of manipulation

In July 2023, Dr Sabyasachi Das of Ashoka University published a report called “Democratic Backsliding in the World’s Largest Democracy” which outlined two manipulations in detail that were carried out in the 2019 Lok Sabha elections.

1) Registration manipulation, which is the padding of the electoral roll. By adding and deleting voters strategically. By manufacturing fake voters, most, if not all, of whom vote for the BJP.

2) Turnout manipulation, which is the addition of voter tallies after the polls have closed-most, if not all, of whom vote for the BJP.[12]

Examples were given, claims supported. Soon thereafter Ashoka University was raided[13] and given a strict warning by the Government. Dr Sabyasachi Das was fired thus, giving a clear signal to all universities and institutions in India, to not pursue any research pertaining to the electoral system in India. I have myself experienced this in another leading private university.[14]  In the 2024 Lok Sabha election, arguably, Das’s findings could be said to have come true. There are well-documented data analysed reports that suggest that electoral manipulation has –for the past six years at least– been pursued in a systematic manner.

Linking Aadhar with the Voter ID could also facilitate ‘registration manipulation’ causing mass disenfranchisement.[15] This linkage could well be the cause for the current controversy concerning duplicate Electronic Photo Identity Cards (EPIC) which has been raised by West Bengal’s Trinamool Congress (TMC) and admitted by the ECI! [16]

The root cause behind the voter registration manipulation is Rule 18 of the Registration of Electors Rules, 1960, which allows for deletion of voter data without notice or an opportunity to be heard by the affected citizen. And, tragically, the Supreme Court allowed this unconstitutional rule which violates the basic right of the citizen to stay in the statute book. [17] This has led to large scale deletion/addition of votes just before elections as was exposed in Maharashtra.

Muslims, Christians, Dalits and Adivasis are the main targets for this “electoral roll purge.” For the 2019 Lok Sabha election India had nearly 900 million registered voters and there has been reports of mass deletion of names from voters’ lists from Assam, Andhra Pradesh, Uttar Pradesh, Karnataka, Uttarakhand and Delhi. An initiative called Missing Voters, estimates that a whopping 120 million Indians are not on the voters’ lists. Of these around 40 million are Muslims while 30 million are Dalits.[18]

 One example six years ago, from the south reveals how voters from the miniscule Christian community have been possibly disenfranchised.[19]  The case of the Kanyakumari Constituency in Tamil Nadu with about 16 lakh (1.6 million) voters’ 45% of whom are Christian and about 5% Muslim—during the 2019 Lok Sabha elections here, in this constituency, more than 30,000 votes were found to be deleted. 

The outcome of such disenfranchisement is already visible: “The eighteenth Lok Sabha (2024) has the lowest share of Muslim MPs in six decades. Less than 5% of its members currently are Muslims despite people from the community forming over 15% of the country’s population. In total, there are currently 24 Muslim MPs (4.4%) in the Lok Sabha. Notably, the record low occurred despite a considerable spike in the share of Muslim MPs from the Indian National Congress, the second-biggest party in the current Lok Sabha. The party with the most members in 2024, Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), has no representatives from the Muslim community currently. In fact, the decline in the share of the Muslim MPs in the Lok Sabha, in the 1990s, coincided with the rise of the BJP, whose total MP tally crossed the 100 mark for the first time in the 10th Lok Sabha (1991-96).” [20]

Across India’s 28 states, Muslims hold roughly 6% of the seats in state legislatures, which is less than half of their national population percentage. The representation of Christians is no better.

As of the latest available data, during Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s tenure, there is almost total absence of Muslim and Christian ministers in the union cabinet.

KB Hedgewar, founder of RSS had openly declared that its aim was not to oppose the British and join the movement for independence but to oppose the yavana (barbarian) snakes (Muslims), who are our real enemies. [21]His lieutenant, MS Golwalkar, who, since June 1940, had been the sarsanghchalak (supreme leader) of RSS, went further and wrote this in 1938: “The non-Hindu people in Hindustan must adopt the Hindu culture and language, must learn to respect and hold in reverence the Hindu religion, and must entertain no idea but those of the glorification of the Hindu race and culture… They may stay in the country wholly subordinate to the Hindu nation, claim nothing, deserve no privileges, far less any preferential treatment, not even citizens’ rights. (Book: We or Our Nationhood Defined).[22]

It is the same Golwalkar who had also given this dastardly call: “Hindus, don’t waste your energy fighting the British; save your energy to fight our internal enemies, which are Muslims, Christians, and Communists.”.[23] Which better way of ‘finishing of’ these ‘internal enemies’ than disenfranchising them!! This could be achieved by the weaponised IES as eloquently displayed in Maharashtra where RSS originated and is headquartered! As it is excessive governmental authority, money power, media surrender and non-implementation of Model Code of Conduct (MCC) have ensured that there is no level playing field!

Now, because of the near total, apparent, caving-in of the political opposition there is a strong possibility that this modus operandi could be replicated throughout the country including the Dravidian fortress of Tamil Nadu. The way IES is being weaponised was discussed and debated at the one-day Civil Society-Political Parties Conference hosted by Constitutional Conduct Group (CCG) on August 13, 2022 wherein eleven opposition parties participated and resolved to fight against ‘misuse’ of EVMs, money power and media.

The Conference claimed that EVMs cannot be assumed to be tamper-proof and resolved thus: “The voting process should be redesigned to be software and hardware independent in order to be verifiable or auditable. The VVPAT (voter verifiable paper audit trail) system should be re-designed to be fully voter-verified. A voter should be able to get the VVPAT slip and cast it in a chip-free ballot box for the vote to be valid and counted.”[24]

At the time, two years ago, the Indian National Congress (INC) assumed the responsibility to take this resolution to the ECI and carry it forward. But this never happened. Nevertheless, citizens did not relent and, in August 2023, submitted a Memorandum to ECI signed by about 10,000 voters making the same specific demand. There has been no response from ECI, to date.

Citizens and civil society kept up the pressure on the INDIA Block emerged thereafter and succeeded, to some extent, in moving them. Leaders of 28 opposition parties meeting at Mumbai in December, 2023 resolved thus: “INDIA parties reiterate that there are many doubts on the integrity of the functioning of the EVMs. These have been raised by many experts and professionals as well…. Our suggestion is simple: Instead of the voter-verified paper audit trail (VVPAT) slip falling in the box, it should be handed over to the voter who shall then place it in a separate ballot box after having verified his or her choice. 100% counting of VVPAT slips should then be done. This will restore full confidence of the people in free and fair elections.”[25]

The resolution was adopted unanimously and the task of conveying this to the ECI was given to the General Secretary, Communications of the INC. Instead of following this agreed upon path, the G-Sec kept writing to ECI seeking appointment which was never given![26]

The repeated, almost wilful sabotage of this resolution and not conveying it to the ECI and backing it up with mass action has cost INDIA Block dearly. This is the main reason why they lost out in the 2024 parliament election when people had actually given the mandate in their favour.

Soon after the 2024 Parliamentary elections, Vote for Democracy (VFD) published a report presenting data that suggested that in at least 79 Constituencies across the country “people’s mandate” had not been reflected in the results.[27] This was in July 2024. The Opposition almost entirely ignored this Report.[28] In fact, while BJP kept silent, it was the INC’s “Election Expert” Yoginder Yadav who not only ruthlessly attacked this Report but hailed the EVM! [29] A complete rebuttal of this authored by this writer was not published by the newspaper.

Despite all these sabotage from within on Constitution Day-2024 (November 26), the AICC president Mallikarjun Kharge called for a ‘Bharat Jodo Yatra’ like campaign to mark the return of ballot papers in elections. “We don’t want EVMs, we want ballot paper,” he said at the party’s Constitution Day event at Delhi’s Talkatora Stadium.[30] Rahul Gandhi, the former president AICC also spoke against EVM publicly on several occasions.

However, when, on February 2, 2025 the INC formed “Empowered Action Group of Leaders and Experts, or EAGLE, to keep a “bird’s eye view” of elections in the country and “monitor the conduct of free and fair elections by the Election Commission of India,” directly reporting to Rahul Gandhi, there was no mention of the problems in the EVS or the campaign announced by Mr Kharge. In a subsequent press conference Rahul Gandhi dodged a question on the campaign and told a media person that the party was seeking “judicial remedy”.

Thereafter, , Jairam Ramesh, General Secretary of the party, without any previous intervention, rushed to the apex court challenging the amendment of Rule 93(2)(a) of the Conduct of Election Rules, 1961, by the union law ministry on the recommendation of the ECI. This amendment –a response to advocates and citizens concerted efforts to access video and electronic data—was aimed at denying access to electronic materials such as CCTV footage, webcasting videos and recordings of candidates, citing ‘concerns over potential misuse’.[31] Just when the matter had built strong public opinion, this move within the courts is likely to see more obfuscation by the ECI –in denying information to citizens.

The lukewarm responses by the main opposition parties to this subversion of India’s entire electoral process, suggests a cynical abdication of the gritty battle to reclaim institutional autonomy and democracy. The Trinamool Congress (TMC) seems to be the only exception. Weeks ago, they have taken the offensive on the manipulation the EPIC numbers (for voters) that they have exposed. According to a TMC leader, “Since EPIC number is linked to voter details, a duplicate EPIC number will lead to denial of voting rights. The EC handbook clearly states that EPIC numbers are supposed to be unique. It is impossible for voters in two different assembly constituencies to have the same first three letters. Voters in different states have been found to have the same EPIC numbers.” And the party has dared the ECI to come clean on this.[32] Admitting their guilt but seeking shelter behind the ‘vast electoral voter data base’, the ECI has so far escaped a united Opposition’s wrath.[33]

Despite this exposure coming from West Bengal, a state that goes to the polls next year, the “technical expert” of the AICC, Praveen Chakravarty — like some of the other opposition leaders– appears to be distinguishing between the allegations of voter list manipulation and previous claims about EVM tampering. “It is very clearly electoral rolls,” Chakravarty said. “What else? I don’t know. But voter lists for sure.”[34] This stand deifies logic given evidence of huge shift in data parameters by the ECI (not releasing actual voter data, only percentages, not releasing evidence of post voting time, voter slips or video etc.). Surely such a gross manipulation of the electoral rolls is only one part of a weaponised IES in which EVMs form the epicentre?

It is critical and crucial that –before one more state election is “lost” despite being won –that the Opposition makes this clear subversion of the IES a top priority to reclaim democracy and every Indian’s constitutional right to exercise her or his franchise.

[The author is Coordinator, Citizens Commission on Elections. He is the Editor of the Book: “Electoral Democracy-An Inquiry in to the Fairness and Integrity of Elections in India.” (Paranjoy-2022)]

Disclaimer: The views expressed here are the author’s personal views, and do not necessarily represent the views of Sabrangindia.

[1] https://www.thehindu.com/opinion/interview/violent-religion-hinduism-golwalkar-hindu-fundamentalists-india/article69228890.ece

[2] https://thewire.in/books/golwalkar-termed-federalism-as-a-poisonous-seed-onoe-is-a-step-towards-his-goal-of-unitary-govt

[3] https://www.hindustantimes.com/india-news/excji-supports-onoe-but-in-phased-manner-101740510246867.html

[4] https://www.hindustantimes.com/india-news/who-is-gyanesh-kumar-the-new-chief-election-commissioner-101739808991356.html

[5] https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/will-detoxify-myself-go-to-himalayas-cec-rajiv-kumar-on-post-retirement-plans/articleshow/117028628.cms

[6] https://www.scobserver.in/reports/eci-appoinments-judgment-pronouncement/

[7] https://prsindia.org/billtrack/prs-products/prs-legislative-brief-4256

[8] https://thewire.in/government/questions-surround-committee-that-certifies-indias-electronic-voting-machines

[9] Unpacking VVPAT Flaws & Vote Discrepancies: Prof. Harish Karnick Speaks – https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=21KufMCHsA4

[10] https://indianexpress.com/article/explained/what-sc-has-told-election-commission-on-evm-data-9832228/

[11]https://ceohimachal.nic.in/CommonControls/ViewCMSFile?qs=KI3gZ53zz1wW9H2IggWkQt6AMp4fx4pdDgcoJeKb%2BBwmUnuqzkOW5snDCdAHtQjdEkHgdXK4%2B0NNzSjv17ntES7kku8hudlvQAE%2B3mKLq9HdFXwCrLfxHA%3D%3D

[12] The 50-page paper, titled Democratic Backsliding in the World’s Largest Democracy, presents evidence that indicates voter suppression to favour Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP): https://hmpa.hms.harvard.edu/sites/projects.iq.harvard.edu/files/pegroup/files/das-india.pdf

[13] https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2023/8/28/row-at-indias-premier-private-university-sparks-debate-on-academic-freedom

[14] https://ssrn.com/abstract=4512936; https://thewire.in/politics/ashoka-university-facultys-research-paper-on-bjp-manipulation-in-2019-election-triggers-row

[15] https://theprint.in/opinion/aadhaar-linkage-can-sink-indias-electoral-democracy-with-voter-profiling-selective-exclusion/786812/

[16] https://open.spotify.com/episode/5j2DsbneJ84iMiFlo8QtXZ?si=SiZHmNgwT_uEgEkzkfDxDw

[17] https://theprint.in/judiciary/voters-should-be-given-prior-notice-before-deletion-from-electoral-roll-sc-affirms-eci-submission/1705393/

[18] https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2019/4/30/allegations-of-mass-voter-exclusion-cast-shadow-on-india-election

[19] https://www.thehindu.com/news/national/tamil-nadu/chorus-grows-for-high-level-inquiry-into-large-scale-deletion-of-names-from-kanniyakumaris-poll-rolls/article26974782.ece

[20] https://www.thehindu.com/data/data-eighteenth-lok-sabha-has-lowest-share-of-muslim-mps-in-six-decades/article68285104.ece

[21] https://www.globalvillagespace.com/muslims-are-hissing-yavana-snakes-traitors-rssfounders

[22] Craig Baxter, The Jana Sangh: A Biography of an Indian Political Party (University of Pennsylvania Press, p.31)

[23] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M._S._Golwalkar

[24] https://www.hindustantimes.com/india-news/11-opposition-parties-resolve-to-fight-against-misuse-of-evms-money-power-and-media-101660414745490.html

[25] https://www.ndtv.com/india-news/evms-evm-india-alliance-meeeing-india-bloc-pas ses-resolution-seeks-100-counting-of-paper-trail-machine-slips-4705846

[26] https://www.hindustantimes.com/india-news/jairam-ramesh-seeks-cecs-time-for-india-bloc-leaders-to-discuss-vvpats-perfectly-reasonable-request-101704171977163.html

[27] https://votefordemocracy.org.in/wp-content/uploads/2024/07/NEW-Edited-ED-240720-Press-Release-LS-2024-election-English.pdf

[28] https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/report-claims-5-crore-vote-discrepancy-india-bloc-would-have-won-maximum-seats-in-lok-sabha-congress/articleshow/112059094.cms; https://m.thewire.in/article/government/election-commission-must-respond-to-doubts-raised-over-lok-sabha-polls-by-vfd-report

[29]https://indianexpress.com/article/opinion/columns/yogendra-yadav-writes-why-its-time-to-stop-the-conspiracy-theories-about-evms-9571458/.

[30] https://www.hindustantimes.com/india-news/we-dont-want-evms-kharge-calls-for-campaign-to-bring-back-ballot-papers-in-elections-101732617353884.html

[31] https://www.thehindu.com/news/national/election-rules-tweaked-to-restrict-public-inspection-of-electronic-records/article69012490.ece

[32] https://www.hindustantimes.com/india-news/tmc-team-to-meet-cec-amid-row-on-voter-id-numbers-101741460231073.html

[33] https://www.business-standard.com/politics/election-commission-has-admitted-guilt-over-duplicate-epic-numbers-tmc-125030701010_1.html

[34] https://scroll.in/article/1079942/voter-rolls-not-just-evms-how-opposition-is-coming-to-a-new-understanding-on-bjps-alleged-rigging

The post India’s election system is being weaponised, will the Opposition act? appeared first on SabrangIndia.

For instance, we need to consider the following factors:

• Performance of the AAP Government,
• Perception of corruption by the AAP,
• Controversy over the official bungalow of Arvind Kejriwal,
• Pollution in Delhi,
• Kejriwal’s failure to protect minority
• Loss of even partial status of the Delhi State given the powers handed by central diktat to the LG, incumbency and the urge for a change,
• Failure to strike alliance between AAP and INC,
• Kejriwal labelling Rahul Gandhi as amongst three corrupt leaders and
• Yamuna water being unfit for consumption
• Selective deletion and addition of electors between the notification of elections on January 7, 2025 and the final electoral roll issued thereafter, on January 17, 2025. The increase was a substantial 76,366 electors in the 10 day period, from 1,55,37,634 to 1,56,14000.
• The EVM, Factor and other alleged election malpractices.

And/or

• Huge income tax relief announced in budget up-to INR 1,13000, and more,
• Landing of deported ones at Amritsar, Punjab rather than that at the Indira Gandhi airport New

The picture of the repeatedly altered register of voters has ensured a mind-boggling impact. This factor has emerged despite the fact that a special summary revision of electoral rolls with reference to the qualifying date of January 1, 2025 was started in all the constituencies. The Draft Electoral Roll had been published on October 29, 2024 and prominently displayed at all places inviting objections by November 28, 2024. This Draft Electoral Roll contained 1,53,57,529

Electors.The registered electors shown in the press release by the CEO at the time depicted 1,47,97,990 electors for the 2020 Assembly, as per the summary of electors posted by the Election Commission of India (ECI) on its web page on Assembly Elections of NCT Delhi 2020. Thereafter on Jan 06, 2025 17:02 hours IST, the ECI released the final electoral roll of Delhi which showed that the national capital has a total 1,55,24,858 voters, 83,49,645 male and 71,73,952 female voters, third gender 1,261.

• Registered Electors in NCT Delhi for Assembly Elections 2020 = 1,47,97,990
• Registered Electors, finally shown in NCT Delhi in Lok Sabha elections 2024 = 1,52,14,638
• Jan 06, 2025 17:02 IST, Registered Electors Summary revision ECI = 1,55,24,858

(Male 83,49,645 Female 71,73,952 , Third Gender 1261 Total 1,55,24,858)

• Elections notified on January 7, 2025, Total Registered electors (ECI) = 1,55,37,634
• ELECTORS AS ON 01.2025 (CEO NCT DELHI) = 1,56,14000

Issue of Electoral Rolls

The repeated and substantial alterations of registered voters by the ECI itself makes the exercise cloudy. The absence of any credible explanation as well as deviation from the norm also shatters the confidence of the electors because of an absence of any degree of fairness. Even under the amended section 14 of the Representation of Peoples Act 1950, the date of eligibility for the registration of electors is January 1, April 1, July 1, and Oct 1 of each year and in the present case of Delhi for the February 2025 elections it is January 1, 2025 under amended section 14 ibid. Since the process had begun on October 29, 2024, but the revised rolls were published only by January 7, 2025 the date of notification should have not resulted in any hike/ injection of electors 10 days thereafter (76366 voters were added as has been explained above). There have been allegations of the unauthorised deletion of names and addition of voters, hence, given that the ECI is a constitutional body owing accountability to the people of India, it is bound under the Constitution and the law to place details regarding the entire process related to the inclusion of new voters, including the documents therein, in the public domain.

Besides, a duty is cast upon the ECI to explain how: a) 13,145 electors got inducted in the voter’s list of the Badli constituency; b) 16,413 electors got inducted into the list of the Nangloi Jat constituency c)17,549 electors got inducted into the list of the in Mundika constituency; d) 7,387 into the lists of the Shahdra constituency; e) 24,759 voters into the lists of the Burari assembly constituency; f) 18,404 added into the list of the Bawana constituency; g) 8,638 voters added into the list of the Vikaspuri constituency and, h) 2,209 votes added into the New Delhi constituency. These examples are illustrations and other constituencies too saw such an increase between the Lok Sabha elections held in Delhi on May 25, 2024 and the NCT assembly elections held on February 5. 2025.

The YouTube news channel run by journalist, Ajit Anjum (@AjitAnjumOfficial ) has made public the study conducted by it on the gross irregularities into the voter registration process that includes the registering of multiple electors at addresses of (six) –in large part—representatives of the BJP!. This study related to a micro 32 addresses from which location, as many as 635 votes ranging between 15 to 44 votes per address were added! Incidentally, some of these “addresses” are even not permitted to be labelled as a residence and some are so small in size that the number of persons (whose names were registered from there) could not have been said to have been registered under:

The pattern in this study (expose) provides a clear indication that there has been a process of “bulk registration” of voters, almost as if targets were given for the exercise.[1]

Voter Turnout

The ECI has faltered, again, on the release of voter turnout data too by altering the timing of the first press release to 5 p.m. instead of 7 p.m. which is one hour after scheduled voting time. The voter turnout at 57.70% in the ECI Press release (vide No. ECI /PN/179/2024 dated February 5, 2025 as of 5.00 p.m.) Though the scheduled voting time was until 6 p.m. The voter turnout percentage was revised to 60.42% by 11.30 p.m. (vide No. ECI /PN/180/2024 dated

February 5, 2025). There was no official press release at 6 p.m. that is at the end of scheduled poll time. Incidentally, the CEO Delhi released yet another figure for voter turnout (60.54%) without mentioning any time. The total number of votes polled have been declared as 94, 51,997.

Status of votes secured by parties, winning margins of contestants and overall impact

An analysis of the votes secured by the parties and the candidates with losing and winning margins in all the 70 seats –including votes polled by the candidates of three major political players, i.e. the AAP, NDA and INC shows that AAP lost 16 seats by a margin of 10,000 votes or less and NDA lost 8 seats in this range. A further analysis also shows that the NDA also won three seats by a margin of less than 1000 votes: Sangam Vihar (344 votes) Tirlokpuri (392 votes) and Jangpura (675 votes). In another three seats, again, the margin of victory of the BJP is very slender between 1001 and 2000 votes: these are Timarpur (1168 votes), Rajinder Nagar (1231votes) and Mehrauli (1782 votes). In another three seats AAP lost by similarly small margins: Malviya Nagar (2131 votes), Greater Kailash (3188 votes), New Delhi (4089 votes), while in the remaining seven seats AAP lost by 5001-10000 votes: Shahdra (5178 votes), Chhatarpur (6239 votes), Mangolpuri (6255 votes), Hari Nagar (6632 votes), Dwarka (7829 votes), Narela (8596 votes), Palm (8952 votes). In contrast, in the seats where it emerged victorious, APP has won all seats by a margin of more than 2,000 votes.

Vote Share

Seats where the margin of loss by APP is less than the votes secured by INC

Pre-poll Opinion and Exit Polls

1. Latest Opinion Poll by Phalodi Satta Bazar: This poll conducted by Madhuri Adnal Time (updated Friday, January 31, 2025, 18:50 hours forecast AAP securing 38-40 seats and BJP an estimated 30-32
2. Gaurav Sharma, in oneindia.com  (published on Monday February 3 2025, 11:08 hours) com/new-Delhi, the opinion polls suggested that the AAP may bag 37 to 40 seats. BJP may clinch 20 to 25 seats, Congress 0 to 2 seats.
3. Hindi Khabar and Mind Brick India in its poll suggested that AAP would get 55 seats. The BJP 15 and INC none.

Conclusion: The pre poll opinion in a majority of the surveys showed that while the APP would get less seats than earlier –the number could reduce to 38-40 seats – it would still form the government while the BJP would get a respectable number of 20 to 32 seats but would not be able to get majority.

DELHI EXIT POLL NEWS 18 www.news18.com › elections › assembly Delhi Assembly Election 2025 Exit Poll Results Latest Updates …Feb 5, 2025 · Get the latest Delhi Assembly election 2025 exit poll results, predictions for Delhi elections, and AAP, BJP, Congress seat forecasts. 

Delhi Assembly elections 2025

Factors that acted as the drivers of a sudden change between January 31, and February 5, 2025

It appears obvious from the above that the scales shifted substantially by the time the exit polls were conducted. Almost all the polls showed the BJP get a thumping majority, on its way to form the next government. AAP was predicted to be trailing behind. Scientifically, we need to therefore conclude that something major occurred between January 31 and February 5 to tilt the scales so decisively.

Some factors

1. Union Budget presented on 1^st of February and FM Sitaraman claims to fill the pockets of middle class and doles out 1 lakh crore in the form of Income Tax Waiver.
2. All tax payers having an income of Rs. 12 lakh and the Salaried persons having an income of 12.75 lakh get total waiver of the income tax thus getting up-to 1.13 lakh rupees per annum as tax waiver and benefit on two rented houses and many other benefits.

Impact of the Income Tax Waiver on Delhi electors

(Income Tax Revenue in Accounting Year 2023-2024)

Significantly, 62.21% of from the Rs.16,63,686.47 crore income tax revenue, during AY 2023-24, came from the three states of Maharashtra 6,05,268.35 crore, NCT Delhi 2,21,522.20 crore and Karnatka 2,08,168.88 crore.

The income tax paid by NCT Delhi turns out to be 13.32% of the total income tax from whole of India. Out of Rs. One lakh crore doled out by the FM by income tax relief, the amount for NCR Delhi totals Rs. 13,315 crore per year.

Income Tax returns filed during 2023-2024

During the financial year 2022-23, in NCT Delhi, 37,06,999 persons filed income tax returns out of which 12,25,820 are the beneficiaries of the income tax relief doled out by the Finance Minister on February 1, 2025. The ECI has stayed mum on the announcement of this dole In the budget four days before the scheduled election. It appears apparent that votes have been lured by this significant dole out. Out of the total beneficiaries, even if 20% of the voters tilted towards the BJP, more than the present win was assured.

This can be established if we analyse the preferences expressed by various segments of the voters in a survey conducted by C Voter that gave a general idea of the demography tilt in favour of the BJP and AAP. Published by India Today, the exit polls have predicted a victory for the BJP in Delhi India Today News Desk New Delhi, UPDATED: Feb 6, 2025 23:12 IST Written By: Prateek Chakraborty. Hence, the figures of preferences of various socio-economic, religious, gender-based, and age group preferences displayed in the C Voter survey published by India Today, strengthens this contention.

From the accompanying table it is patently clear that higher income groups have tilted to BJP especially those having income in this tax bracket. This displays an overall tilt of 50%, while those with an income of Rs. one lakh or more per month show a 54.9 and 61.1% preference for BJP while AAP has a support of only 32.7% and 25.8% respectively

Similarly there has been a greater shift of the male voter towards the BJP on this count. A total of 51.4% men have preferred the BJP whereas, on the contrary, 50.7% of women voters preferred AAP. This shows the impact of this budget announcement, again.

Since the budget has nothing for the house wives and labour has also been denied any benefit, more than 51% of these categories, i.e. housewives 51.5% and labour 51.8% have opted for AAP.

Since youth has not been given the requite hope from the budget, youngsters between 18-22 and 23-35 have preferred AAP to the tune of 46.7% and 45.4% respectively

This income tax relief is only beneficial for the employed, who come from college levels and professionals who can have start-ups and loans. Therefore, the impact of budget announcement of tax relief is manifest in these categories for BJP: 53.9% of the above high school and 54.5% professionals have preferred BJP

Another factor that has probably played a role in the dramatic last minute shift was the deliberate decision of the government of India to give permission for the landing of the first US military airplane at the Guru Ramdas International Air Port Amritsar not in Delhi. This carrier transported, in handcuffs and chains, 104 deported migrants. Of these 33each were from Gujarat and Haryana, 30 from Punjab, and three each from Maharashtra, Uttar Pradesh and Chandigarh,

Though the numbers of deportees were highest from Gujarat and Haryana, a compliant and complicit media had begun a campaign to depict those deported as only from Punjab. There was a significant undercurrent of anti-Sikh minority bashing in the ‘Godi” media coverage. However, the chief minister of Pubjab, Bhagwant Mann announced government jobs for all the 30 deportees from Punjab. This too had its impact in NCT Delhi: 49.1% Sikhs and 63.1% Muslims preferred AAP to any other party in the polls.

Acknowledgements: The reaction of voters at pages 6,7 above have been taken from the C Voter Survey published by India Today on February 6, 2025. The income tax data has been taken from the official website of the tax authorities. The voter percentage and other voter related data has been interpreted from the website of the ECI and the CEO, Delhi.

(The author is former Dean, Punjab University Faculty of Medical Sciences)

Disclaimer: The views expressed here are the author’s personal views, and do not necessarily represent the views of Sabrangindia.

[1] The author states this because of the similarity in pattern: the same numbers of registrations getting from different locations, irrespective of the size, nature or status of place or of Residents. This is normally not possible without a connivance of the authorities and some protection from the powers that be. The Table raises the question, has the process of registration of electors been manipulated/vitiated for the injection of fake electors?

Related:

SABRANGINDIA EXCLUSIVE: Election 2024, ECI: Technical glitch, gross negligence or deliberate manipulation?

VFD’s draft reports points to “electoral manipulation and irregularities” in Haryana and J&K 2024 assembly elections

EVM row: Winning MLA from Malshiras (Markadwadi) issues ultimatum to ECI, demands elections by ballot papers

The post Who orchestrated APPs failures, the FM and her ex-FS or the ECI? appeared first on SabrangIndia.