Gutthi, a young Dalit vassal is wrongfully accused of assaulting a collection agent. But he gives the slip to the two policemen chasing him and runs for his life. This trying experience affords him an epiphanic moment of spiritual transcendence.
The following is an excerpt from Kuppalli Venkatappa Puttappa’s Bride in the Hills, translated into English by Vanamala Viswanatha from the original magnum opus Malegalalli Madumagalu.
Despite rain pattering on the leaves in the dense forest, Gutthi can still hear the piteous voice of Bushy Mush, the Police Dafedar with a thick moustache, crying out for help from the bog in the lakebed. He can also hear Scraggy Mush, the young sergeant, trying to surround him from the roadside, cursing. Gutthi runs, runs without stopping. He runs up the hill through the forest, heedless of the painful, festering gash caused by Ijara Sabi’s club. His only aim is to run as far away, as fast as possible to escape from the peril that is pursuing him, impervious to questions like: Where? Which way?
When his blanket cloak gets caught in the thorns, he yanks it off the bush running, and shoves it under his arm. When his head gear is caught in a sharp thorny bush tearing it, he just pulls it off, uncaring, and wears it around his waist, still running. Minus the cloak and head-cloth, he is now completely drenched from top to toe. He has not even noticed that his face, scratched by a sharp twig, has started bleeding. When a stubble jams his foot, he stops for a moment to pluck it off; he has no time to notice that his foot is bleeding. He does not even bother with the army of leeches that has invaded every part of his body, creeping up his legs and surrounding his waist, thighs and loins. The heavy sweat pouring down his heaving chest mingles with the rainwater falling on his head, dripping down, turning his shirt and dhoti into a wet bundle.
‘Bride in the Hills’, Kuvempu, Penguin Random House, 2024.
How long has he been running? Gutthi has no idea. At some point, when he feels in his heart that he is out of danger, he throws his cloak aside on the log of an ancient tree fallen in the middle of the jungle and sits down panting. His one-eyed and four-legged devotee, also utterly drenched, tries to sit at his feet, but soon, in order to escape from the menace of the leeches, it jumps on the log, and settles down next to his master, looking taller than him. Some liquid— saliva or water—starts dripping from its tongue. The master’s consciousness is in no position to register the steam or the fetid smell emanating from its wet, hairy body.
What has he done? What has happened to him? It takes Gutthi quite some time to grasp. Once he regains his breath, he is able to think calmly. His present strategy to escape seems more dangerous than the danger he has escaped from: What if Bushy Mush has drowned in the bog and died? What if Scraggy Mush, trying to save his boss, also sank in the bog? Won’t they hold him responsible for the crime and lead him to the gallows? They must have already begun a search for him. Where can he hide? And how? He could possibly cross the river, flee to regions like Muthur or Koppa or Mundakaru, change his name, and not show up in this region for a couple of years. By then, hopefully, the dust would have settled, and all this will be forgotten. But, but, what about Thimmi, his girl Thimmi? Just the thought of Thimmi makes his nerves weak, and he feels sleepy and exhausted. His natural dynamism suffers a paralysis. In that terrifying jungle, in the ruthless apathy of the towering trees piercing the sky, in the horrendous lonesomeness of the torrent that has just let up, he feels his helpless isolation mocking at him, and Gutthi breaks down sobbing, holding onto his devoted dog Huliya, sitting next to him—taller, firmer, and braver, and drawing strength from Huliya’s powerful sinews to boost his sagging spirit. He had never wept like this before. Not quite comprehending his mood, Huliya responds to his master, somewhat playfully.
Why not take Thimmi along and flee? But how? The news had already spread that Bettalli Kallayya Gowdaru had cunningly sent her parents and brothers to get her back home with the intent of marrying her off to someone else. When this is so, if Gutti appears in the Bettalli settlement, would they spare him? Won’t they take the first opportunity to hand him over to the police? Ayyo . . . what sin did he commit in his last life to deserve this? Otherwise, why should these things have happened? Why did those Muslims bring their ware that very day to Simbavi? If that perverted bastard Ijara sabii had not killed his household’s pregnant doe, why would Gutthi get into a ruction with the Muslim fellow? It’s all that Muslim’s doing, but he is paying the price. It is Sanna Bira who threw the knife at the Sabi. No one will believe his words. They’ll only say, ‘Where does that wimpy guy have the strength to throw?’ Is it Gutti’s fault that he is strong? He must have committed grave sins in his last life and so he is being punished now.
All of a sudden, the thought flashes across Gutti’s mind. If he hadn’t been a Holeya, from that wretched low caste, would he have to face this fate? What if he belonged to some other caste? Gowda? Vaishya? Brahman? No way is that possible, not in this life. Or he could have been a Muslim? Or a Christian? Thoo . . . thoo . . . thoo,’ he spits out, rejecting a possibility that crosses his mind. Yet, he is reminded of the padre’s prayers and snatches from his sermon that evening as the sun was setting, after Devayya’s bicycle lessons in the Bettalli clearing. Along with it, the memory of the words of wisdom offered by Mukundayya and Aigalu while reading out episodes from the Ramayana and the Mahabharata rush into his mind. Some of the thoughts he had grasped from watching the Bhagavata’s performance also surface from his subconscious mind as companions in distress to save him in his most trying moment. Gutthi then stops crying. Taking a deep breath, as if he is drawing in courage, Gutthi sits up and pleads with God in his own crude way, but full of ardent feeling and devotion. His God is as complex in nature: being embodied and being disembodied, taking this form and that. His God is all of it, yet none of it, except for being an entity filled with Gutthi’s feelings, just the sum total of all of Gutthi’s ardent feelings . . . enough to make any Vedantin’s philosophy shudder. But surely, the heart-felt prayer of the Holeya, an expression of his fervent appeal, ascends to the lotus-feet of God.
Vanamala Viswanatha is a scholar-translator who has translated important classics from pre-modern and modern Kannada literature into English.
District officials opposing the memorial had argued that Swamy was allegedly related to Naxal and Maoist groups.
New Delhi: Quashing a notice by district authorities, the Madras high court allowed a farmer from Tamil Nadu’s Dharmapuri district to erect a statue of late Father Stan Swamy.
The petitioner, Piyush Sethia, had proposed to build a stone memorial commemorating Swamy on his private land.
Swamy was an 84-year-old Jesuit priest who worked for tribal rights in Jharkhand. He was implicated in the Bhima-Koregaon case and imprisoned under the draconian UAPA in 2020. Swamy passed away in jail due to post-Covid complications in 2021.
Sethia, who works on cooperative watershed development and farming, had said that Swamy taught “sustainable farming and lifestyle practices” to farmers of his village. Calling Swamy his mentor, Sethia said he wanted to commemorate his lifelong work to “protect the welfare of the Adivasi communities”.
Sethia contended that a notice from district officials sent to him in July, 2021 had prevented him from building the memorial, the Telegraph reported.
Quashing the notice, Justice M. Dhandapani observed that the notice “is not proper” and the charges against Swamy had never been proven.
Sethia’s counsel also pointed out that there were several legal precedents allowing statues of revered persons on private land.
The district authorities, opposing the memorial, said that Adivasi hamlets in Dharmapuri were a “haven for anti-social elements, with their ideology opposing the government and its functions”. The officials said Nekkundi village, to which Sethia belongs, was a “sensitive” area.
Officials also argued that Swamy was allegedly related to Naxal and Maoist groups.
However, the court dismissed these claims saying, “When an allegation put forth against a person is not proved, then the said allegation is nullity. In the instant case, Fr Stan Swamy had taken more efforts for the welfare of the tribals and the issue on hand is the erection of his statue/ stone pillar on the petitioner’s private land. As a general principle, the law grants citizens the right to install statues in their own private property. The only restriction is that such an erection of the statue should not bring any conflict between two communities or in a way that would hurt the feelings of a particular society. There is no legal impediment if erection of a statue at a private land is permitted.”
The court added that as Sethia will bear the expenses of the memorial’s construction, any permission from authorities is not required.
Swamy’s arrest and death
The octogenarian activist’s arrest and mistreatment in prison during the pandemic had drawn widespread backlash across the world.
Swamy, who was a Parkinson’s patient, had to move the court for a sipper so that he could drink water without hindrance. However, the court rejected his plea. Subsequently, several activists and concerned citizens sent dozens of sippers to the jail he was lodged in.
The activist had appealed for bail in lower courts at least thrice and once in the Bombay high court.
A year after his death, an investigation by a Boston-based firm, Arsenal Consulting, had revealed that fabricated “evidence” was planted on the activist’s laptop.
Reservation is not the cause of caste – it is a consequence. Without dismantling caste-based discrimination, even reservations cannot create a level playing field.
In an earlier article, I discussed how Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s slogan, “Ek Rahenge To Safe Rahenge (If we remain one, we will be safe)”, is intended to oppose the idea of a caste census, which Rahul Gandhi has been championing as a key opposition leader. For the first time, a leader from the lineage of Jawaharlal Nehru, Indira Gandhi, and Rajiv Gandhi – leaders who historically resisted caste-based reservations and the enumeration of caste data – has taken a firm stand on the caste question. Rahul Gandhi now speaks like an Ambedkarite, frequently invoking the names of B.R. Ambedkar, Jyotirao Phule and Periyar in his public speeches. He has made the demand for a caste census an unavoidable challenge for the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh-Bharatiya Janata Party government.
Gandhi likens the caste system in India to the hidden iceberg that sank the Titanic in the early 20th century. Just as the iceberg, concealed beneath the ocean’s surface, destroyed the massive ship, the caste system, embedded in the social hierarchies of Indian society, has undermined India’s potential as a nation. Previous governments failed to recognise this “hidden iceberg” and its destructive impact on the fabric of Indian society.
Gandhi is the first major leader from the Congress Party to acknowledge and confront this systemic problem.
Prime Minister Modi, himself from an Other Backward Castes (OBC) community, uses his caste identity to mobilise Shudra OBC votes. However, he claims that a caste census will divide Hindu society – a belief echoed by the RSS and some ‘upper’ caste intellectuals. These groups often avoid naming specific castes like Brahmin, Bania, Kayastha, Khatri or Kshatriya, preferring the vague term “Hindus” to describe their social bloc. This avoidance masks the deep inequalities and hierarchies within the so-called Hindu community.
The term “Hindu” has become a mystical label, often used to obscure the historical exploitation of Dalits, Shudras and Adivasis by ‘upper’ castes. However, the caste census has the potential to reveal the realities of caste-based inequalities and foster unity, not division.
A caste census will identify individuals by their traditional social groups, often tied to specific occupations, and provide an accurate count of their population. While critics argue that this will entrench caste identities, the reality is that caste-based discrimination already exists. A census will simply expose its extent. Crucially, the data will also show how many people have moved beyond their traditional caste occupations, illustrating social and occupational mobility.
For instance, Brahmins are traditionally associated with priesthood, a profession deemed ‘pure’, while Chamars are linked to leatherwork, considered ‘impure’. These labels have perpetuated untouchability and discrimination for centuries. Occupational change is therefore essential for reducing caste-based inequalities. If the census reveals that Chamars are entering professions like teaching or administration, or that Brahmins are engaging in leatherwork, it will indicate progress toward a casteless society.
The ultimate goal is to eliminate caste-based discrimination and inequality. To achieve this, caste names must carry equal respect, and inter-caste occupational mobility must become the norm. Schools, colleges and universities should promote the dignity of all professions and encourage occupational diversity.
A truly casteless society evolves when individuals shift into new occupations, acquire new skills and engage in inter-caste marriages. Inter-caste marriages foster cultural exchange and reduce the rigid boundaries imposed by caste. Caste, after all, has also created significant divides in food habits, rituals and social practices.
B.R. Ambedkar proposed the idea of ‘Annihilation of Caste’, but few substantial theoretical frameworks have emerged since. The intellectual elite, predominantly Dwija (upper-caste), have largely ignored the issue, treating caste as if it does not exist. Even during the Mandal movement of the 1990s, discussions were limited to the merits and demerits of reservation, rather than addressing caste as a systemic problem.
Reservation is not the cause of caste – it is a consequence. Addressing the root issue requires a deeper approach, akin to diagnosing and treating a cancer. Without dismantling caste-based discrimination, even reservations cannot create a level playing field.
Communists, meanwhile, focused on class over caste, leading to their political decline. In contrast, the RSS and BJP have used caste-based representation as a tool for electoral success. However, the RSS’s vision of Sanatana Dharma inherently upholds caste hierarchies and rejects spiritual democracy, preventing any real progress toward equality.
Historically, the Congress failed to recognise caste as a structural issue, leaving space for the RSS-BJP to rise to power. Rahul Gandhi’s ‘X-ray’ analogy – calling for a caste census as a diagnostic tool – is a step toward addressing caste inequalities. A caste census would act as an X-ray of Indian society, followed by deeper analysis (a ‘scan’) and intervention (a ‘biopsy’).
The census would provide comprehensive socioeconomic data, highlighting areas of inequality. While caste identities may persist for some time, the immediate focus should be on eradicating caste-based discrimination and occupational stigma. For example, the belief that a Brahmin’s child should not engage in leatherwork or that a Dalit cannot become a temple priest must be challenged.
Accurate caste data would have other benefits as well. Castes with inflated perceptions of their population may face a reality check, while underrepresented groups may mobilise for a fair share of resources and opportunities. Education, a critical driver of occupational change and inter-caste marriages, would gain renewed focus.
The caste census is not merely a tool for identifying inequalities but a roadmap for building a more equitable society. By understanding and addressing caste-based disparities, India can move closer to Ambedkar’s vision of a society where dignity, equality and opportunity transcend caste.
Kancha Ilaiah Shepherd is a political theorist, social activist, and author. His latest book is The Shudra Rebellion.
Yadav asked whether there was an “X factor” behind BJP’s unprecedented win in the state.
Eminent political scientist, former psephologist and political activist Yogendra Yadav speaks with The Wire on the astonishing victory of the Bharatiya Janata Party-led Mahayuti in Maharashtra. He says that although many opinion polls gave an edge to the Mahayuti, what was surprising was the difference of 14 percentage points in vote shares of the BJP-led alliance and Congress-led Maha Vikash Aghadi – something that flattened all the conventional voting patterns of the state. He asks whether there was an “X factor” behind BJP’s unprecedented win in the state.
On October 19, 2024, the Mahavikas Aghadi or MVA alliance parties had written to the Election Commission of India that Bharatiya Janata Party is engaged in massive voter list fraud, which includes deletion of 10,000 votes of MVA supporters in each constituency.
The EC was also informed that BJP was adding 10,000 fake voters to hide 10,000 names being deleted by them.
It was suspected that total number of names of MVA supporters deleted from the voter list after the Lok Sabha elections could be nearly 30,00,000 in the state.
Impact one
The votes of three main parties of MVA decreased by 32,80,000 from Loksabha to Vidhansabha elections! Is it a coincidence?
Fact two
MVA had also informed Election Commission that BJP was also fraudulently adding new names to the list.
Impact two
In five months after Lok Sabha elections 2024, the number of total voters in Maharashtra increased by 47,00,000.
While there was an increase of only 37,00,000 voters in Maharashtra in five years from 2019 Lok Sabha elections to 2024 Lok Sabha elections, the votes of three main parties of BJP alliance increased by 67,70,000 in assembly elections vis-a-vis the Lok Sabha elections.
Did 47,00,000 new voters contribute significantly to the increase of BJP votes?
Fact three
Transfer of Rs 1,500 per month to women under Ladki Bahin Yojna is being talked of as a major factor behind the victory of the BJP alliance. Surveys had predicted an impact of 2-3% for the Mahayuti.
Impact three
A 3% increase translates to almost 20,00,000 votes out of 640,00,000 votes polled in the assembly elections.
If one removes 47,00,000 new voters from Mahayuti’s lead of 67,70,000 votes, the lead remains 20,70,000! Amazing coincidence?
Fact four
NCP’s Ajit Pawar faction got 58,10,000 votes and won 41 seats.
NCP’s Sharad Pawar faction got 72,80,000 votes and won 10 seats.
Interestingly, the two factions of NCP were contesting against each other in 39 seats, of which Ajit Pawar’s party won 33.
Is this precise, robotic surgery normally possible?
Another fun fact
The vote lost by Congress and Shiv Sena (Uddhav Bal Thackeray) from the Lok Sabha to assembly polls totals 47,10,000. New voters added were 47,00,000.
Gurdeep Singh Sappal is a permanent member of the Congress Working Committee.
‘You can’t question the Election Commission. They are not prepared to answer questions. They are not prepared to even entertain a memorandum from the citizens.’
In an interview to Karan Thapar, economist and current affairs commentator, Parakala Prabhakar, drew attention to inexplicable and disconcerting discrepancies in the official turnout figures put out by the Election Commission in Maharashtra which, he says, “question the legitimacy of the mandate”.
The chat, full of allegations of mathematical impossibilities in the EC’s poll data, sheds light on a matter that cries out for an explanation from the Election Commission.
Below is the full text of the 30-minute conversation.
The following has been transcribed by Manya Singh, The Wire‘s editorial intern. The text has been edited lightly for style and clarity.
Karan Thapar: Hello and welcome to a special interview for The Wire. The well-known economist and current affairs commentator Parakala Prabhakar has spotted a mystifying, inexplicable and disconcerting discrepancy in the official turnout figures put out by the Election Commission for Maharashtra. It seems between close-up polls and the final tally, the turnout increased by nearly 8%.
That didn’t happen in Jharkhand, where it increased by less than 2% and 1% on the two days of polling. Now, Maharashtra, as you know, was won by the NDA and Jharkhand by the INDIA bloc. So today we ask, how do we explain this unprecedented increase in the Maharashtra turnout? Dr. Parakala is not suggesting that this is because of EVMs or ballot tampering, nor is he saying this is the reason for the NDA’s victory.
But that doesn’t mean this massive discrepancy doesn’t need to be explained. Joining me now is the well-known economist, current affairs commentator and Finance Minister Nirmala Sitharaman’s husband, Parakala Prabhakar. Dr. Parakala, I want to talk to you about the tweets you have put out about the Election Commission’s Maharashtra and Jharkhand turnout figures.
Let’s start with Maharashtra. I’ll come to Jharkhand after that. At 5 pm on the 20th, the turnout in Maharashtra was deemed to be 58.22%. By 11.30 pm on the same day, it had increased to 65.02%. Before counting on the 23rd, it had gone up yet again to 66.05%. This means that the turnout increased by 7.83%. That’s such an astonishing figure.
I want to repeat it for the audience. The turnout increased between 5 pm and 11.30 pm by an astonishing 7.83%. That’s such a huge increase in terms of the number of people. Can you start by estimating for me how many people that would actually be?
Parakala Prabhakar: Karan, 5 pm there was a figure of 58.22%. And 58.22%, the gross number would be 5,64,88,024.
By 11.30 pm, that percentage has gone up to 65.02%, which gross figure would be 6,30,85,732. Between 5 pm and 11.30 pm, the total hike in gross number is 65,97,708. In other words, about 66 lakhs.
But the hike doesn’t end there. Just a few hours before the counting, again, there was an increase of 9,99,359. That’s almost about 10 lakhs.
All put together, from 5 o’clock on the 20th to 11.30 pm on the 20th, and some 12 hours before counting, the total increase was 75,97,067. That’s about 76 lakhs.
That is such an astonishing figure that it bears underlining for the sake of the audience, what the Election Commission is asking us to believe, is that between the formal close of polls at 5 pm on the 20th, and the last voting that happened at 11.30 pm on the 20th night, an additional almost 76 lakh people voted.
That is such a difficult figure for most people to believe. They would turn around and say it’s unbelievable. Isn’t it very hard to swallow?
Yes, if you look at the historical data, never ever have we had a situation where the Election Commission announces a provisional figure at 5 o’clock.
But then the final count is given a few hours later. Because there may be people who are waiting on the premises and they’re all allowed to vote. After that is also done, finally in the night, they give you the final figure.
Historically, the discrepancy or the difference between the provisional figure and the final figure has never ever crossed 1%. It has always been under 1%. Now today we are in a situation where between the provisional figure and the final figure, it is 7.83%. Gross figure is about 76 lakh votes.
Let’s take up the point you made that after polls officially closed at 5 pm, if there are still people waiting on the premises or in the compound, they are permitted to vote because they arrived there before polls closed. Let’s for argument’s sake, purely for argument’s sake, assume that there were 1000 people waiting in the compound to vote. Each of them arrived before 5 pm, so each of them would have a right to vote.
Now, let’s assume that it takes one minute per person to vote. Actually, it takes a lot longer. It takes around four or five at least.
But let’s for argument’s sake assume it takes one minute per person to vote. That means those 1000 people waiting to vote would take 1000 minutes to do so. And 1000 minutes is 16.6 hours.
But the problem is that between 5 pm and 11.30 pm, there’s only six and a half hours. So even in the six and a half hours available for extra voting, that 1000 simply could never have voted. And if the 1000 could never have voted, how on earth could 76 lakh have done so? So my question is a simple one.
How is this huge increase of nearly 8% to be accounted for? Does the Election Commission give any explanation? Or are they silent?
Karan, there is one more impossibility here. You know, a booth across India, on an average, has between 1,000 and 1,200 votes. If after polls closed, 1,000 people voted and usually it takes 16 hours, as you said, does it mean that throughout the day nobody voted? But the Election Commission says that 58.22% have voted.
That’s one. The second thing is the Election Commission’s own manual says that, people who have entered the premises [get to vote] – and the doors will have to be closed, the gate will have to be closed – and the last person waiting will be given a slip bearing ‘number one’. And the closest person to the booth is given the last number so that there are no more additions after the gates are closed.
And the whole process will have to be videographed. And all these slips will have to be deposited. Now, when people like us ask, ‘Where is the videograph?’, the Election Commission doesn’t say anything.
The Election Commission doesn’t give you any explanation. Not only here, even during Lok Sabha elections, we found a lot of discrepancies, but no answer is forthcoming from the Election Commission.
You’re making a very good point, Dr. Parakala, in addition to my point that it’s almost impossible if there were 1,000 people waiting to vote for them to have voted, because there simply wasn’t time for them to do so.
But you’re making an additional point on top of that, which is, if there was such a large number of people waiting to vote, it means that in many constituencies, people wouldn’t have voted at all. Because the constituencies simply do not have so many people to vote for both.
Both points vitiate the claim that 7.83% voted after the polls closed at five o’clock and before 11.30 pm. Let’s now come to your tweet about Jharkhand. There were two phases of polling in that state. In phase one at 5 pm, the turnout was 64.86%. By 11.30 pm, it had increased to 66.48%, which is just a 1.79% increase and very different to the 8% increase in Maharashtra.
In phase two, the turnout at 5 pm was 67.59%. By 11.30 pm, that had become 68.45%. That’s an increase of only 0.86%. And again, hugely different to the nearly 8% increase in Maharashtra. So the first question I want to ask you is how come the turnout didn’t increase in Jharkhand after polls closed the way it did in Maharashtra? Doesn’t that require an explanation?
Well, it does. And if you want the gross figures, I can give you the gross figures also.
Let’s talk about phase one. At 5 pm, the gross voting was 88,92,771. And the 11.30 announcement, after the provisional announcement, it was 91,14,885.
It’s about 1.62 as you said. And even this is also slightly more because it’s more than 1%. It’s more than one and a half percent.
But historically speaking, it’s never crossed. I think it’s very unusual to cross 1%.
What is therefore the total gross figure of people that 1.79% represents – of poll day one – in Jharkhand?
The hike was 2,22,114.
Very interesting. The hike for polling day one in Jharkhand was 2,29,000. The hike in Maharashtra was 76 lakhs.
It’s a vast differential between the two. And I might add the hike for polling day two in Jharkhand, where the difference was only 0.86% would be way below 2 lakhs. And therefore, the margin of difference with Maharashtra would be considerably greater.
For phase two, the gross hike of voting and the discrepancy is just about 1,06,560. And that translates into 0.86%. Look at what happened in Maharashtra and what happened in Jharkhand.
Absolutely, which is why I say to you, doesn’t it require an explanation?
It does require an explanation.
It requires scrutiny. It requires that the Election Commission come clean on this.
And so far, they’ve said nothing.
The point is stonewalling. You know, they say nothing, Karan. They say nothing. We did not say anything. We’ve questioned. We’ve given a memorandum. Citizens have given memorandum. I’m not talking about the political parties.
So even though citizens have given a memorandum about this to the Election Commission, the Election Commission is silent.
It doesn’t even acknowledge. Citizens don’t matter.
Let’s go one step further, Dr. Parakala. In Maharashtra, where the turnout increased by nearly 8%, the NDA won.
In Jharkhand, where the turnout increased by less than 2% and 1%, the INDIA bloc won. Doesn’t that raise the question, is there a link between the increase in turnout and who wins?
I’ll give you a little more detail, Karan. You see, with a 1.79% hike in Jharkhand’s first phase, NDA wins 17 out of 43 seats.
Please listen to this carefully. With a 1.79% increase, NDA wins 17 out of 43. Whereas, with 0.86% increase, NDA gets 7 seats out of 30. Did you follow me?
I do indeed. You’re underlining the point I made. The greater the increase in the turnout after polling closes, the more seats NDA wins.
The smaller the increase in the turnout after polling closes, the opposition, the NDA, INDIA bloc win. And that’s the point I’m asking. It seems that there is a link between the increase in turnout and who wins.
A large increase in turnout, NDA wins. A very small marginal increase in turnout, INDIA bloc wins. Again, that needs someone to explain, doesn’t it?
Exactly, exactly. You see, for instance, let’s go back a little into the past and look at Haryana assembly elections. Should I say something only to highlight this?
Absolutely. Let me put it for you because you explained this to me.
You’ve spotted the same thing in Haryana during the recent Vidhan Sabha elections. And you spotted something very similar in UP during the June Lok Sabha election. In Haryana, the vote share increased by 6.7% and the BJP won.
It was a surprise victory. In UP, the vote share increased by under 0.5%, less than 1%. And the opposition won the majority of seats.
So again, what happened in Maharashtra and Jharkhand seems to have happened earlier in UP and Haryana, didn’t it?
Now, since you’ve raised UP also, it’s very interesting because UP confirms the historical trend of being under 1%. UP went to polls in third, fourth, fifth, sixth and seventh phases. In the third phase, the hike was 0.2%. In phase four, the hike in UP was 0.34%. In phase five, in UP the hike was 0.23%. In phase six, the hike was 0.01%. In phase seven, the hike in UP was 0.25%. So the highest hike was 0.3%.
And the result was NDA got 36, they were down from 62, their previous number, and INDIA, 43. And one seat was the one that Azad Samaj Party won, Mr. Chandrashekhar.
Very true. Once again, the same thing has happened as we are noticing between Maharashtra and Jharkhand.
The larger the increase, the larger the hike in voters after the official polling ends, the greater the chance of the NDA winning. The smaller the increase, the greater the chance of the opposition parties, i.e. the India bloc doing better. Again, the same thing happened in Maharashtra, Jharkhand, the same thing you’re saying happened earlier in UP and Haryana
Can I give you a couple of data points for Haryana? It’s very interesting because you see BJP’s strong performance in Haryana was in 10 districts.
And in 10 districts, they won 37 out of 44. And the remaining 12 districts, they won only 11 out of 46. Now, in those 10 districts where the NDA performed very well, the strike rate was very high, 37 out of 44, the discrepancy was over 10%. And if you want the district wise, I’ll give you just two districts. Panchkula 10.52%, Charki Dadri 11.48%. This is Haryana.
And Haryana, therefore, is underlining the point we made.
The greater the percentage discrepancy, the more likely it is that the NDA, of which the BJP is the main component, will win. It happened in Maharashtra, where the discrepancy was 7.83%. And you’re citing Haryana as another instance where it happened. The overall discrepancy in Haryana was 6.77%. But in individual constituencies, the discrepancy went up to 10 and 11%.
And the BJP won. This, once again, requires an explanation. Why is it that if a large number of people are voting after polls officially closed and before the voting ends, the NDA wins? And why is it that if it’s a very small number of people who are the additional voters, the opposition INDIA bloc with? That cries out for an explanation, doesn’t it?
It does. You know, Karan, I want to trust the Election Commission, because it’s a constitutional body. Although the appointments, if you see, after the amendments, etc, they don’t give you much confidence still. But then the Election Commission will have to give me a solid reason for me to be able to defend the Election Commission.
Now, if this is the kind of discrepancy from 5 pm to 11 30 pm, again, before counting, if these are the things, if they are not properly explained, how do I have confidence in the integrity of the election process, my democratic process?
That is the important point you’re making, that the discrepancies you pointed out create suspicion in people’s minds. And in turn, that suspicion will fuel damaging speculation, which will vitiate the system of voting in India, and go on to vitiate our democracy. That suspicion has to be ended.
It questions the legitimacy of the mandate.
Absolutely. And in a very real sense, the figures that we’re discussing, the arguments that we’re making in this discussion, question the legitimacy of what happened in Maharashtra.
Because there is suspicion about that 76 lakh additional number of people who voted after polls formally closed, people wonder, where did they come from? How did they manage to vote? Well, how come that the BJP won? All those are questions that arise, and all of those questions vitiate the process of voting, and then they go on to vitiate India’s democracy. This is why what you revealed is so important.
And this is also why the Election Commission’s stonewalling, as you put it, refusing to answer memorandums put up by citizens is so worrying.
That’s true. They don’t give footage.
They don’t give us the slips. And one more thing, Karan, in most of these phases, the Election Commission doesn’t give the gross voting. It just gives the percentage.
It doesn’t give the gross voting in the constituencies. It gives only district-wise percentages and state-wise percentages.
Let me put this to you.
This deliberate silence surely amounts to irresponsibility on the part of the Election Commission. They know, because it’s not a secret, that this silence is damaging, that it fuels suspicion, that suspicion undermines our voting and our democracy. Therefore, to continue to be silent is irresponsible, isn’t it?
You know, I have a feeling, Karan, that the Election Commission thinks that it is not accountable.
You know, you can’t question the Election Commission. They are not prepared to answer questions. They are not prepared to even entertain a memorandum from the citizens.
Could that be because the Election Commissioners, it’s often said, have been appointed as favourites of the government? That is a suspicion that is not part of our discussion. But you’re aware of it. I’m aware of it.
Could that be one explanation that these are favourites of the government, which is why they’re keeping quiet? Exactly.
And probably they have an agenda. You know, if the Election Commission, the Election Commissioners, come out with a solid explanation for these kinds of discrepancies, I’m prepared to listen.
Citizens are prepared to listen. Convince us. But you see, this on the face of it, in whatever way you want to, you know, you might say that this is a last minute surge.
You might say that, you know, there is a difficulty at 5 o’clock or 11 or 10 o’clock, when the polls close, it takes time for the information to reach the Election Commission, for them to compile. It might take time. So it’s all late.
And then the figures are revised from time to time. All that can be believed only if it is a completely manual thing. But you have the presiding officer know exactly at the close of a poll, or at any point of time, how many votes were polled there.
Because it’s electronic.
Exactly. And then it’s just a matter of, you know, this getting uploaded to the Election Commission.
Which means that the earlier explanations that might have worked when it was manual balloting, no longer apply and no longer work.
And what is worrisome is even when it was manual, even when we did not have internet connections, and even when we had bad telephone connections in far flung areas, rural areas, we were able to update the final figures within a few hours after the closing of polls.
Secondly, can you believe in a constituency like Chandigarh, Lok Sabha constituency, which has say about 15 square kilometres or so, well connected urban area, fully Wi-Fi, wherever you are. Even in that constituency during the Lok Sabha elections, the Election Commission takes about four days to update the final figure. How do you explain that?
Absolutely. And so we end this programme with one very simple point.
That astonishing increase of 7.83% in the number of people who voted after polls officially closed at 5 pm on the 20th, and before the polling finally finished at 11.30 pm, is so large, so astonishing, it needs an explanation. And the silence and refusal by the Election Commission to explain it creates suspicion. That suspicion in turn leads to speculation, and that speculation could vitiate our voting process and vitiate our democracy.
And as you said, it raises questions about the mandate in this particular instance that we’re talking about. It raises questions about the Maharashtra mandate. And those are questions that are very damaging for a country that’s proud of being the world’s largest democracy.
Let’s leave it there. I thank you for drawing our attention to this. It’s a very worrying concern that I’m grateful that you’ve highlighted.
Now let’s hope the Election Commission becomes responsible and responds to what you’ve raised. Thank you very much indeed. Take care, Dr. Parakala. Stay safe.
Stock trading scams accounted for the highest losses, with Rs 4,636 crore reported across 2,28,094 complaints. Investment-related scams followed, costing victims Rs 3,216 crore from 1,00,360 cases, reported The Indian Express.
New Delhi: India suffered cyber fraud losses amounting to Rs 11,333 crore in the first nine months of 2024, according to data from the Indian Cyber Crime Coordination Centre (I4C), a division of the Ministry of Home Affairs.
Stock trading scams accounted for the highest losses, with Rs 4,636 crore reported across 2,28,094 complaints. Investment-related scams followed, costing victims Rs 3,216 crore from 1,00,360 cases, while “digital arrest” frauds led to losses of Rs 1,616 crore from 63,481 complaints, reported The Indian Express.
Data from the Citizen Financial Cyber Fraud Reporting and Management System (CFCFRMS), accessed by The Indian Express, revealed nearly 12 lakh cyber fraud complaints in 2024. Of these, 45% originated from Southeast Asian countries, including Cambodia, Myanmar, and Laos.
Since its inception in 2021, the CFCFRMS has recorded 30.05 lakh complaints, with total losses reaching Rs 27,914 crore. The yearly breakdown shows 11,31,221 complaints in 2023, 5,14,741 in 2022 and 1,35,242 in 2021.
Prime Minister Narendra Modi recently addressed the issue of “digital arrest” frauds during the 115th episode of his Mann Ki Baat radio programme. He stressed that no government agency contacts individuals via phone or video calls for investigations and clarified, “There is no system like digital arrest under the law.” Modi urged citizens to remain vigilant against such scams, after Indians lost Rs 120.3 crore in digital arrest frauds in the first quarter of this year.
Analysis of fraud cases revealed that stolen funds are often withdrawn through methods such as cheques, central bank digital currencies (CBDCs), fintech crypto platforms, ATMs, merchant payments and e-wallets. The I4C has frozen approximately 4.5 lakh mule bank accounts in the past year to disrupt the laundering of cybercrime proceeds.
At an anti-terror conference, the I4C highlighted key challenges in investigating cyber fraud cases. These included the anonymity offered by digital wallets, foreign money exchanges, insufficient KYC protocols, VPN access and cryptocurrency-related fraud originating from abroad.
In collaboration with the Ministry of Telecommunications, the I4C has blocked 17,000 WhatsApp accounts linked to cybercriminals operating out of Southeast Asia. This move aims to disrupt offshore criminal networks, even as social engineering, deep fakes, ransomware, zero-day exploits and supply chain attacks emerge as new forms of cybercrime.
Vaishnaw spoke of generating a ‘societal consensus’ for stricter laws, which is often a term for majoritarian consent and eventually censorship of politically unpalatable content.
New Delhi: While answering a question in Parliament during question hour in the Lok Sabha on Wednesday, November 27, Union Minister of Information & Broadcasting, Railways, and Electronics & IT, Ashwini Vaishnaw, spoke of further tightening existing laws governing social media and OTT platforms.
He said, “We are living in the era of social media and OTT platforms. However, the democratic institutions and traditional forms of the press that once relied on editorial checks to ensure accountability and correctness of content, have seen these checks diminish over time.”
As per the PIB release on the matter, he noted that due to the absence of such editorial oversight, social media has become a platform for freedom of press on one hand, but on the other hand, it has also become a space for uncontrolled expression, which often includes vulgar content.
Vaishnaw made a cultural point, used often by the Modi government to shut down rights of expression enshrined in the Indian Constitution’s fundamental rights.
“The cultural sensitivities of India vastly differ from those of the regions where these platforms were created. This makes it imperative for India to make existing laws more stricter and he urged everyone to come to a consensus on this matter.”
He was responding to a question by Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) MP Arun Govil (who incidentally owes his profile mostly to having played the role of Lord Ram in Ramayana which was screened on Doordarshan in the 1980s) on whether the government intends to make laws more stringent to curb misuse of digital platforms.
The Minister said the Parliamentary Standing Committee should take this up as a priority.
“There should be societal consensus on it, along with stricter laws to address this challenge” he said.
The Information Technology (Intermediary Guidelines and Digital Media Ethics Code) Rules, 2021 (IT Rules, 2021) under the Information Technology Act, 2000 have mandated a Code of Ethics for OTT platforms. Publishers are required not to transmit any content which is prohibited by law and to undertake age-based classification of content into five categories, based on general guidelines provided in the Schedule to the Rules, reports Bar and Bench.
The Code also mandates that OTT platforms provide for adequate safeguards and ensure only age-inappropriate content makes its way to children.
The IT Rules, 2021 make it obligatory for platforms like YouTube and Facebook to make reasonable efforts to ensure that their users do not “host, display, upload, modify, publish, transmit, etc. any information which is obscene, pornographic, paedophilic, invasive of another’s privacy, insulting or harassing on the basis of gender, racially or ethnically objectionable, or that is harmful to children.”
In February 2021, the government formally tightened its control over digital and OTT platforms with a three-tier mechanism that it termed as a “soft-touch regulatory architecture”. The first two tiers put in place a system of self-regulation, the crucial third calls for an oversight mechanism managed by central government bureaucrats, something that has come under severe criticism, for being a means of controlling free speech and expression.
In August, 2023, Internet freedom Foundation submitted a detailed response to the union government’s proposal to regulate OTT content, saying that it was “apprehensive of the approach of selective banning of OTT services, given its ad-hoc, ambiguous, and impractical application, and the negative consequences it may have of user choice and freedom.” You can read the submission here.
Additionally, revenue foregone through various deductions granted to companies has exceeded Rs 8 lakh crore over the past decade, according to an analysis of tax data by The Hindu.
New Delhi: India’s largest corporations have benefited significantly from reduced tax rates introduced under the concessional tax regime in 2019, saving an estimated Rs 3.14 lakh crore in taxes over five years, a data story by The Hindu has shown. Additionally, revenue foregone through various deductions granted to companies has exceeded Rs 8 lakh crore over the past decade, according to an analysis of tax data.
Before the tax reform, domestic companies with an annual turnover of up to Rs 400 crore were taxed at 25%, while others faced a 30% rate. The 2019 policy overhaul slashed the corporate tax rate to 22%, provided companies waived certain deductions under the Income Tax Act. Newly established manufacturing firms were offered even lower rates under specific conditions, reported The Hindu.
Experts note that this move reflects a preference for a simpler tax system with reduced rates; however, concerns persist about its impact on government revenues and broader economic outcomes.
Suranjali Tandon, associate professor at the National Institute of Public Finance and Policy, told The Hindu that while lower rates simplify the tax system, the evidence of increased private sector investment remains mixed, especially since the tax incentives coincided with the pandemic. “The profitability of companies has allowed them to create reserves and invest in current assets. In part, the anticipated demand can influence the decision to make capital investments,” she said.
R. Nagaraj, distinguished senior fellow at IIT Bombay, criticised the move as disproportionately benefiting the business community, citing parallels with the Laffer curve arguments popularised during the Ronald Reagan administration in the US. “We do not have any evidence of this working anywhere in the world, especially not in India,” he told The Hindu.
Analysis of the BSE 500 index shows that until FY19, the effective corporate tax rate for these firms averaged over 30%. This rate dropped to 21.2% by FY24 under the new regime. The top 10% of these companies consistently enjoyed lower effective tax rates compared to the overall average.
The savings estimate of Rs 3.14 lakh crore was derived by projecting pre-2019 tax growth trends, assuming a compound annual growth rate of 11.5% for tax payments and comparing it to actual collections post-reform.
In addition to the tax rate cuts, companies have availed various deductions under the Income Tax Act, including those for donations to charitable trusts, political contributions, scientific research and undertakings in northeastern states. These concessions have cost the government Rs 8.22 lakh crore in revenue between FY13 and FY22, according to budget documents.
Zico Dasgupta, assistant professor of economics at Azim Premji University, emphasised the need for a cost-benefit analysis of these tax concessions. “Since tax concession also means forgone expenditures by the government, it seems to me that the more important policy question pertains to a cost-benefit analysis of providing greater tax concession,” he told The Hindu.
While the reduced tax rates were intended to spur private investment and foster a globally competitive business environment, the broader impact remains inconclusive. Experts caution that the resulting decline in the corporate tax-to-GDP ratio could constrain the government’s ability to finance developmental expenditure.
Hint: It involves finding just the right proteins. With new ingredients and processes, the next generation of substitutes will be not just more egg-like, but potentially more nutritious.
An egg is an amazing thing, culinarily speaking: delicious, nutritious and versatile. Americans eat nearly 100 billion of them every year, almost 300 per person. But eggs, while greener than other animal food sources, have a bigger environmental footprint than almost any plant food — and industrial egg production raises significant animal welfare issues.
So food scientists, and a few companies, are trying hard to come up with ever-better plant-based egg substitutes. “We’re trying to reverse-engineer an egg,” says David Julian McClements, a food scientist at the University of Massachusetts Amherst.
That’s not easy, because real eggs play so many roles in the kitchen. You can use beaten eggs to bind breadcrumbs in a coating, or to hold together meatballs; you can use them to emulsify oil and water into mayonnaise, scramble them into an omelet or whip them to loft a meringue or angel food cake. An all-purpose egg substitute must do all those things acceptably well, while also yielding the familiar texture and — perhaps — flavor of real eggs.
Today’s plant-based eggs still fall short of that one-size-fits-all goal, but researchers in industry and academia are trying to improve them. New ingredients and processes are leading toward egg substitutes that are not just more egg-like, but potentially more nutritious and better tasting than the original.
In practice, making a convincing plant-based egg is largely a matter of mimicking the way the ovalbumin and other proteins in real eggs behave during cooking. When egg proteins are heated beyond a critical point, they unfold and grab onto one another, forming what food scientists call a gel. That causes the white and then the yolk to set up when cooked.
That’s not easy to replicate with some plant proteins, which tend to have more sulfur-containing amino acids than egg proteins do. These sulfur groups bind to each other, so the proteins unfold at higher temperatures. As a result, they must usually be cooked longer and hotter than ones in real eggs.
To make a plant-based egg, food scientists typically start by extracting a mix of proteins from a plant source such as soybean, mung bean or other crops. “You want to start with what is a sustainable, affordable and consistent source of plant proteins,” says McClements, who wrote about the design of plant-based foods in the 2024 Annual Review of Food Science and Technology. “So you’re going to narrow your search to that group of proteins that are economically feasible to use.”
Fortunately, some extracts are dominated by one or a few proteins that set at low-enough temperatures to behave pretty much like real egg proteins. Current plant-based eggs rely on these proteins: Just Egg uses the plant albumins and globulin found in mung bean extract, Simply Eggless uses proteins from lupin beans, and McClements and others are experimenting with the photosynthetic enzyme rubisco that is abundant in duckweed and other leafy tissues.
These days, food technologists can produce a wide range of proteins in large quantities by inserting the gene for a selected protein into hosts like bacteria or yeast, then growing the hosts in a tank, a process called precision fermentation. That opens a huge new window for exploration of other plant-based protein sources that may more precisely match the properties of actual eggs.
A few companies are already searching. Shiru, a California-based biotech company, for example, uses a sophisticated artificial intelligence platform to identify proteins with specific properties from its database of more than 450 million natural protein sequences. To find a more egglike plant protein, the company first picked the criteria it needed to match. “For eggs, that is the thermal gel onset — that is, when it goes from liquid to solid when you heat it,” says Jasmin Hume, a protein engineer who is the company’s founder and CEO. “And it must result in the right texture — not too hard, not too gummy, not too soft.” Those properties depend on details such as which amino acids a protein contains, in what order, and precisely how it folds into a 3D structure — a hugely complex process that was the subject of the 2024 Nobel Prize in chemistry.
The company then scoured its database, winnowing it down to a short list that it predicted would fit the bill. Technicians produced those proteins and tested their properties, pinpointing a handful of potential egglike proteins. A few were good enough to start the company working to commercialize their production, though Hume declined to provide further details.
Cracking the flavor code
With the main protein in hand, the next step for food technologists is to add other molecules that help make the product more egglike. Adding vegetable oils, for example, can change the texture. “If I don’t put any oil in the product, it’s going to scramble more like an egg white,” says Chris Jones, a chef who is vice president of product development at Eat Just, which produces the egg substitute Just Egg. “If I put 8 to 15 percent, it’s going to scramble like a whole egg. If I add more, it’s going to behave like a batter.”
Developers can also add gums to prevent the protein in the mixture from settling during storage, or add molecules that are translucent at room temperature but turn opaque when cooked, providing the same visual cue to doneness that real eggs provide.
And then there’s the taste: Current plant-based eggs often suffer from off flavors. “Our first version tasted like what you imagine the bottom of a lawn mower deck would taste like — really grassy,” says Jones. The company’s current product, version 5, still has some beany notes, he says.
Those beany flavors aren’t caused by a single molecule, says Devin Peterson, a flavor chemist at Ohio State University: “It’s a combination that creates beany.” Protein extracts from legumes contain enzymes that create some of these off-flavor volatile molecules — and it’s a painstaking process to single out the offending volatiles and avoid or remove them, he says. (Presumably, cooking up single proteins in a vat could reduce this problem.) Many plant proteins also have molecules called polyphenols bound to their surfaces that contribute to beany flavors. “It’s very challenging to remove these polyphenols, because they’re tightly stuck,” says McClements.
Experts agree that eliminating beany and other off flavors is a good thing. But there’s less agreement on whether developers need to actively make a plant-based egg taste more like a real egg. “That’s actually a polarizing question,” says Jones.
Much of an egg’s flavor comes from sulfur compounds that aren’t necessarily pleasing to consumers. “An egg tastes a certain way because it’s releasing sulfur as it decays,” says Jones. When tasters were asked to compare Eat Just’s egg-free mayonnaise against the traditional, real-egg version, he notes, “at least 50 percent didn’t like the sulfur flavor of a true-egg mayo.”
That poses a quandary for developers. “Should it have a sulfur flavor, or should it have its own point of view, a flavor that our chefs develop? We don’t have an answer yet,” Jones says. Even for something like an omelet, he says, developers could aim for “a neutral spot where whatever seasoning you add is what you’re going to taste.”
