Last Updated:
While the Opposition may be crying hoarse over discrepancies, not a single party has gone to EC’s Bihar unit to file a claim or objection against any entry made in the draft list
ECI data from Maharashtra and Karnataka are classic cases of the political parties making allegations of “vote chori” in media but not availing of the appeals as enshrined in the Representation of People’s Act. (PTI)
Donald John Trump is seeking a residency certificate in Bihar. Believe it or not, but the son of Fredrick Christ Trump and Marry Anne Macleod, Donald J Trump, wants a certificate to prove that he is a resident of Mohiuddinagar in Patori, Samastipur.
The application follows Sonalika tractor in East Champaran, Dogesh Babu in Nawada and Dog Babu in Patna. Residency certificates are also being sought in the name of Sri Ram, son of Kawwa (crow) Singh and Maina Singh in Khagaria.
Opposition leaders like TMC MP Mahua Moitra are using instances like these to highlight the discrepancies in the Bihar Special Intensive Revision (SIR) Exercise. Moitra, a petitioner in Supreme Court against the Election Commission of India, highlighted that the residency certificate is one of the 11 acceptable documents mentioned by EC in its June 24 order.
The concern is genuine. The district administrations in Khagaria, Patna, and Nawada have rejected these application forms, complete with a picture of the US president and a tractor. FIRs have been registered and probe is on for cybercrime.
Yet, it does raise questions if fake domicile or residency certificates are being made in Bihar with less-obvious discrepancies.
ECI’s Contention
The Election Commission says the onus is on the state government to ensure that such frauds are exposed. But it adds that the BLO (Booth Level Officer) and ERO (Electoral Registration Officer) may not be hood-winked so easily even if fake documents were produced.
EC’s contention—The 11 documents mentioned in the June 24 order are only indicative. BLOs and EROs can ask for other documents if they have a doubt. Plus, at the stage of EPIC card being made, the applicant will have to be photographed and photo identity cross-checked.
EC says it has increased the number of BLOs on ground from about 78,000 to approximately 91,000 to ensure that Stage 2 of the SIR exercise is more effective. Doubts, however, remain, given the number of discrepancies that are being highlighted.
No Objection By Political Parties
Despite the discrepancies though, not a single political party has gone to EC’s Bihar unit to file a claim or an objection against any of the entries made in the draft voter list.
As per data released by EC till 11am on August 7, 5,015 objections were made by voters but none by the 1,60,000 booth-level agents of political parties.
Opposition Fighting A Perception War?
More than 65 lakh voters have been left out of the draft voter list. A total of 22.34 lakh have been marked dead, 36.28 lakh as permanently shifted/absent, and 7.01 lakh already enrolled (Duplicate Epic).
In an urgent hearing in Supreme Court on Monday, petitioners argued that EC has deliberately left out details of why over 65 lakh voters have been deleted from the draft roll.
The petitioners claimed that the poll body had the data on the reasons for deleting the names, but it still removed the column specifying these reasons before releasing the draft roll on August 1.
The petitioners claimed that in the absence of specific information, the list “provided by the EC serves no purpose, and cannot be used to cross-check any details from the ground”.
Voters and BLAs still have three weeks to avail of the claims and objection window. But ECI data from Maharashtra and Karnataka are classic cases of the political parties making allegations of “vote chori” in media but not availing of the appeals as enshrined in the Representation of People’s Act.
In Maharashtra, 89 appeals were filed in stage 1-(before the first appellate authority, District Magistrate, under Section 24(A) of the Representation of People’s Act, 1951, from the time draft roll was published till the final voter list was made) and only one appeal in final stage (before the second appellate authority—Chief Electoral Officer—under Section 24(B) of the same Act.)
In Karnataka too, the logjam remains. While Rahul Gandhi alleges “vote chori”, EC data suggests no election petition has been filed and no objection raised either.
“Between the draft and final publication of rolls in Karnataka, about 9.17 lakh claims and objections were received for consideration. But none from any political party,” the state’s EC unit recently claimed after Gandhi’s latest charge of fraudulently adding voters.
So, will Bihar go the same way?
Will Bihar follow the Maharashtra and Karnataka model? Alleged discrepancies will be highlighted in the media but no recourse will be taken to avenues mentioned in the RP Act?
EC has dismissed all criticisms and defended itself stoutly, both before the Supreme Court of India and in its daily press notes. So, will this become a sound byte vs press note battle where the 65 lakh left-out Bihar voters will have to fend for themselves? The clock is ticking.
Arunima is Editor (Home Affairs) and covers strategic, security and political affairs. From the Ukraine-Russia War to the India-China stand-off in Ladakh to India-Pak clashes, she has reported from ground zero …Read More
Arunima is Editor (Home Affairs) and covers strategic, security and political affairs. From the Ukraine-Russia War to the India-China stand-off in Ladakh to India-Pak clashes, she has reported from ground zero … Read More
view comments
Read More
