Category: Government

‘Punishing the Whistleblower’: Mehbooba Slams J&K Admin for Transferring Officers Amid Smart City Probe

Without taking names, the PDP chief said that the action against the three officers of the agency – which probes economic offences in the Union Territory – has exposed the “nexus between the corrupt and the most powerful”.

Srinagar: A day after three police officers of J&K’s Anti Corruption Bureau (ACB), which is investigating the allegations of corruption in Smart Cities Mission project in Srinagar were repatriated to the home department, former chief minister Mehbooba Mufti has accused the administration of “punishing the whistleblower”.

The order to repatriate the officers of the elite J&K Police Service (JKPS) cadre was issued six days after one of the officers and a superintendent of police (SP) in the ACB, Abdul Wahid Shah, came out with a press conference, alleging that there was large-scale bungling in the implementation of the Smart Cities Mission project in Srinagar city.

Mufti, who is also the president of the opposition Peoples Democratic Party (PDP), said that the order “highlights the risks faced by officials who challenge corruption” and that the issue has raised “questions about the government’s commitment to justice and accountability.”

Also read: No Direct Train to Delhi, New Rail Link a Dampener For Locals And Traders in Kashmir

Without taking names, the PDP chief said that the action against the three officers of the agency – which probes economic offences in the Union Territory – has exposed the “nexus between the corrupt and the most powerful”.

“This action of punishing the whistleblower has revealed the government’s true intentions behind using various agencies including ACB to raid properties of Kashmiris under the guise of corruption investigations,” Mufti said in a post on X on Friday, January 17.

Srinagar was selected as one of the two cities for the urban renewal project in 2017 by the Union Ministry of Housing and Urban Affairs following which Srinagar Smart City Limited (SSCL), a special purpose vehicle was set up under the Companies Act, to execute the developmental works in J&K’s summer capital.

The SSCL has the divisional commissioner of Kashmir as its chairman and inspector general of police and deputy commissioner of Srinagar as other members on the board of directors, among others. 

In a press conference on January 10, SP Shah said that following a secret investigation, Sajid Yousuf Bhat, chief financial officer of SSCL and Zahoor Ahmad Dar, an SSCL executive engineer, were allegedly found to be in possession of “assets which are prima-facie disproportionate to their known sources of lawful income” following which the agency had filed a case. 

The case was filed under section 13(1)(b) (criminal misconduct by intentionally enriching himself illicitly during the period of his office) and section 13(2) (criminal misconduct by official) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (FIR N0. 02/2025) at ACB Srinagar police station, the agency said later in a statement.

Shah said that warrants were obtained by the agency from a city court and searches were conducted at seven places in Jammu and Kashmir in connection with the case.

On January 14, the agency said that it had opened two preliminary inquiries into the alleged misappropriation of material procured to give Srinagar city a new look and the use of substandard material for executing the Union government’s flagship project which was launched by Prime Minister Narendra Modi on 25 June, 2015. 

The first inquiry is related to the alleged misappropriation of devri stones, path tiles, iron grills and other materials used in the smart city project.

“The material is suspected to have been either unaccounted for or allegedly sold in the open market for personal gains, during the revamp and beautification under the Srinagar Smart City Ltd. project rather than being retained in the stores of the concerned Engineering Division,” the agency said in a statement.

Also read: Amit Shah’s ‘Kashmir-Kashyapa’ Remark Sparks Debate, Academics Weigh In

The ACB said that the second inquiry was taken up to probe the use of “substandard material in ongoing development work at Foreshore Road Nishat in Srinagar City for Cycle Track, Footpath facing Dal Lake & viewing decks etc from Nishat upto Naseem Bagh PHC (Public Health Centre).” 

The agency claimed that unidentified SSCL officials “in connivance with the beneficiary contractor also deliberately avoided the mandatory procedures thereby compromising the quality of works.”

Two days later, a transfer order was issued on Thursday (January 16) by M. Raju, commissioner secretary in J&K’s general administration department (GAD) and signed by lieutenant governor Manoj Sinha which directed the repatriation of three JKPS cadre officers to J&K’s home department “in the interest of administration”. 

Along with SP Shah, the other two officers who were transferred are Mohammad Rashid and Rakesh Kumar. Three new officers have been posted to the ACB in their place. 

Earlier, the ruling National Conference (NC) said that the party had been expressing concerns “from the very beginning” regarding the “haphazard” implementation of the project in Srinagar city. “It [alleged corruption scandal] should not have happened. It will be premature to pinpoint certain individuals but this is certain that we found it shady from the very beginning and unfortunately it turned out to be true,” Salman Sagar, NC MLA from Srinagar, said.

Uttar Pradesh Police Arrest 5 Muslim Men After Bajrang Dal Alleges ‘Conversion’ Plan

The arrest took place after the men conducted a celebratory ceremony and prayers to commemorate the death anniversary of a Muslim spiritual leader inside the house of a Dalit family.

New Delhi: Police in Uttar Pradesh’s Hamirpur district have arrested five Muslim men on charges of unlawful conversion after they conducted a celebratory ceremony and prayers to commemorate the death anniversary of a Muslim spiritual leader inside the house of a Dalit family.

The family – comprising one Urmila and her husband Ajit Verma – had got a mazaar (shrine) constructed inside their house in Hamirpur’s Maudaha area allegedly on the suggestion of the accused persons as they believed that praying to a ‘saint’ would cure Urmila’s illnesses and end their woes.

On the night of January 10, when the Dalit family was conducting an “urs” (Islamic religious ceremony commemorating the death anniversary of a saint) inside their house, the event was disrupted by members of the Hindutva group Bajrang Dal. These activists also brought the ceremony to the attention of the police and accused the Muslim men of trying to convert the family into Islam.

“An urs programme was going on at the house when we reached there at 2.30 am in the night. Chadar poshi (ritual offering of a sacred sheet of cloth) was happening at the shrine. Some maulanas were giving speeches. They were trying to convert the Dalit family to Islam by promising to cure their illness and offering them money,” Ashish Singh, former convenor of the Bajrang Dal district unit, told a local television channel.

Four of the Muslim men were arrested on January 10 itself and one, a day later.

The five persons arrested by the police were identified as Nooruddin (55), his nephew Meraj Hasan (32), Khalif (42), Irfan (46) and Mohammad Hanif (52). They were booked for criminal intimidation and slapped with Sections 3 and 5 (1) of The Uttar Pradesh Prohibition of Unlawful Conversion of Religion Act, 2021.

Also read: A Birthday Party, a Legal Battle and an Acquittal: The Story of a False Conversion Case

While Urmila did not make any adverse comments against the five men while speaking to local media, the FIR was registered on a complaint submitted in her name. The Wire has a copy of the FIR, in which Urmila said she had come in touch with Nooruddin, originally a native of Banda, while trying to find a treatment for a prolonged illness she had been suffering from for over two years. “We also had trouble in our house. I would go from one place to another to get myself examined and during this time I met Nooruddin,” said Urmila.

She said that Nooruddin asked her to visit a mazaar and promised her that once she did so, she would feel better and all her troubles would be resolved.

On one occasion, Urmila said, Nooruddin came to her house with his nephew Meraj and Khaliq, and built a mazaar in one corner of the house. “He said ‘You worship this and conduct an urs, all your troubles will go away’,” said Urmila.

From time to time, Nooruddin and his associates would offer her family allurements and ask them to convert to Islam along with their relatives, alleged Urmila. She also said that the Muslim men had asked her to hold an ‘urs’ every year.

The January 10 ‘urs’ programme was held at Urmila’s house by Nooruddin and his associates. They also read the faateha (a Muslim prayer), said Urmila.

She alleged that the five men made promises of money against the family’s conversion to Islam.

“’You people belong to a lower caste. You will fall into a higher caste in the Muslim religion. You will continue to get money from the Muslim religion and you will not have any problems’ they told me,” said Urmila, as per the FIR.

“On the insistence of these people and after being tempted by them, we agreed to talk about religious conversion in a hushed tone. But after a lot of thought, we realised that these people would mislead us and make us convert from Hindu religion to Islam. Then, my husband and I decided that we will not convert our religion. We had come under their influence,” she said.

Manoj Kumar Gupta, Additional Superintendent of Police, Hamirpur, said that police reached the spot after receiving information there were attempts being made for “an illegal religious conversion” at some person’s house in Maudaha.

Talking to a Hamirpur-based local YouTube channel outside the Maudaha police station, Ajit Verma and Urmila denied that they had converted to Islam.

“He (Nooruddin) asked me to do an urs every year. I have no idea what an urs is. I am a Hindu, how can I worship like a Muslim?” said Urmila.

“We are Hindus and will remain Hindus,” said Ajit Verma.

Bengal Police Conduct Searches at Doctor’s House Days After He Speaks to Reporters on ‘Saline Scam’

A team of over 30 Bidhannagar police officers conducted a search of Asfakulla Naiya’s residence in the Kakdwip block of the South 24 Parganas district. Naiya told The Wire that the search took place in his absence.

Kolkata: Days after he publicly criticised an alleged medicine adulteration scam in West Bengal’s state-run hospitals, police raided the home of junior doctor Dr. Asfakulla Naiya. Naiya was a prominent figure in the protests which took place in the aftermath of the trainee doctor’s rape and murder at the R.G. Kar Medical College and Hospital.

A team of over 30 Bidhannagar police officers conducted a search of Naiya’s residence in the Kakdwip block of the South 24 Parganas district. Naiya told The Wire that the search took place in his absence and that he was staying at his designated hostel at R.G. Kar Medical College in Kolkata at the time of the search.

Speaking to The Wire, Naiya said, “I don’t know why they searched my house or what the charges are. I woke up in the morning to this news. My family informed me that a large police force with cameras entered my house and conducted a search. My elderly mother and siblings at home were shocked. If I have done anything illegal, the police should call me.”

Prior to the search, Naiya had spoken to The Wire on January 13, alleging significant corruption within the healthcare system in Bengal.

On January 15, he was slapped with a show-cause notice following a complaint alleging that he practised as an “ENT specialist” at a private medical service provider’s clinic in the state despite lacking the necessary qualifications for that specialisation. 

Naiya is convinced that the search is meant to coerce him into silence. “As the day of the trial for the murder of the doctor at R.G. Kar is approaching, we doctors are preparing for that legal battle and at the same time fulfilling our duty of providing medical services too. At this time, it is plain to see that the administration has taken such a step to deliberately flummox us,” he said.

“If the police secretly leave something in my house in my absence, who will be responsible for it? This is a deep conspiracy!” 

The deputy commissioner of the Bidhan Nagar Police Station, Anis Sarkar, told The Wire that the search was conducted legally.

“After receiving a complaint, we obtained permission from the Bidhan Nagar court. With a search warrant from the court, we conducted a search at the junior doctor’s residence today,” said Sarkar.

The complaint against Naiya was first brought up publicly last month by a spokesperson of the ruling Trinamool Congress party, Kunal Ghosh and the Junior Doctors’ Association (JDA), a doctors’ body with close ties to TMC. During the several month-long agitation for justice and systemic changes after the R.G. Kar murder, several doctors had been vocal in alleging corruption and a threat culture perpetrated by some JDA office-bearers. 

Naiya had been a prominent face of the Junior Doctors’ Forum which led the protests, which culminated after a meeting between the doctors and chief minister Mamata Banerjee.

The forum had notably opposed the reinstatement of doctors Avik De and Birupaksha Biswas to the West Bengal Medical Council. The duo had been removed in September last year for allegedly promoting a culture of intimidation and corruption in medical colleges. Both were affiliated to the TMC.

Several doctors’ bodies have spoken in support of Naiya.

In a strongly worded statement, the Joint Platform of Doctors’ Organisations had said, “The Medical Council can never send police to a doctor’s house. If a doctor does anything illegal, they can ask for an explanation by letter. Here, the police have been sent to the house of a protesting doctor as an act of political vendetta. If the government does not stop such actions, doctors and health workers will have to take to the streets again.”

The Association of Health Service Doctors has also strongly condemned the TMC government’s vindictive politics. 

This is not the first time that the government has executed such action.

During the R.G. Kar movement, Alok Kumar Verma, a doctor from Uttar Pradesh working at North Bengal Medical College in Siliguri, participated in the protests and went on a hunger strike in solidarity with the junior doctors in Kolkata. Following instructions from the West Bengal Police, the Uttar Pradesh Police had visited his home in Lucknow and conducted a search. His family was reportedly pressured to convince him to withdraw from the movement.

Similar incidents occurred with other doctors, including a woman from Bankura, whose home was also searched by the police, allegedly to intimidate her family.

Also read: What the Deaths of Women Due to the Use of Expired Saline Says About Bengal’s Healthcare

Medinipur Medical College death controversy

Meanwhile, the Bengal government on January 16 suspended 12 doctors from Midnapore Medical College and Hospital following the death of a woman and the illness of four others after childbirth, allegedly due to the administration of expired intravenous fluid. Chief minister Banerjee condemned the incident and announced a compensation of Rs 5 lakh and a government job for the deceased woman’s family.

It was alleged that the maternal death and subsequent illnesses were linked to Ringer’s Lactate saline supplied by Paschim Banga Pharmaceuticals, a company previously blacklisted by the Karnataka government. Since then, the state government has issued a directive stopping use of medicines supplied by the company in state-run hospitals. However, the health secretary maintained that the saline batch sent to MMCH had undergone proper testing.

Translated from the Bengali original and with inputs from Aparna Bhattacharya. 

CIC Spent Over Rs 45 Lakh on Annual Convention in 2024, RTI Reveals

This revelation has raised questions about the necessity of such extravagant expenses for events aimed at promoting transparency and accountability.

New Delhi: A recent RTI filing has uncovered that the Central Information Commission (CIC) spent over Rs 45 lakh on the annual convention held on December 10, 2024.

The event, which aimed to promote transparency and accountability, had incurred expenses that included hiring vehicles, purchasing plants, woollen shawls, jute bags, mementos, and RTI books. As per the reply, Rs 15,32,762 was spent on catering, while Rs 12,21,128 was spent on logistic support. The total amount spent was Rs 45,11,749.

Details of expenses incurred by the CIC for two-day annual convention held in December 2024.

Details of expenses incurred by the CIC for the annual convention held on December 10, 2024.

Details of expenses incurred by the CIC for two-day annual convention held in December 2024.

Details of expenses incurred by the CIC for the annual convention held on December 10, 2024.

The RTI application was filed on December 16 by retired naval officer and activist Commodore Lokesh K. Batra, who sought to uncover the expenses incurred by the CIC for the convention. In response, the CIC revealed that all the expenses were met from the budgetary allocation, with no separate financial support provided by the Department of Personnel and Training (DoPT).

“Expenditure for organising Annual Convention/Seminars/Events in the Central Information Commission for financial year 2023-24 and Financial year 2024-25 is met from the Annual Budget allocated to CIC by DoPT. No separate financial support is provided by the DoPT for organising Annual Convention/Seminars/Events,” read the reply.

A previous RTI query filed by Batra in February, 2015 inquiring about the total expenditure details for organising ‘Annual RTI conventions/events’ for the financial years 2012-13 and 2013-14 revealed that Rs 12.06 lakh was incurred for the annual conventions/events during 2012-13 and Rs 14.16 lakh was spent on the same in 2013-14. However, the commission had suggested that “no “Record” for proceedings of the meeting was maintained since it is an internal one day meet of the Commission in Commission’s office itself.”

This revelation has raised questions about the necessity of such extravagant expenses for events aimed at promoting transparency and accountability.

The Draft Digital Personal Data Protection Rules: Surveillance For Surveillance’s Sake

Rule 22 of the Draft Digital Personal Data Protection Rules opens the door for unchecked government surveillance.

The Draft Digital Personal Data Protection Rules released on January 3 paint a worrying picture. Though aimed at establishing a comprehensive data protection framework, the Rules fall short in crucial areas like enforcement and transparency, with a particularly troubling provision under Rule 22.

The Digital Personal Data Protection Act, enacted in 2023, granted authority to the Union government under Section 36 to demand information from data fiduciaries or intermediaries. Rule 22 has taken this a step further, allowing the government broad discretion to demand sensitive personal data from companies without the consent of individuals, with the criteria under the Seventh Schedule of the Rules for such requests remaining vague and undefined.

What does it mean for personal data?

Under the Rules, one of the primary grounds to demand data is “in the interest of sovereignty and integrity of India or security of the State,” as outlined in the Seventh Schedule. This justification is alarmingly vague, allowing for potential overreach and arbitrary use without clear, enforceable limits.

Additional grounds for requesting data include “performing functions under existing laws, fulfilling obligations under any law in force, actions by persons authorised under applicable laws, and conducting assessments to designate certain entities as Significant Data Fiduciaries”. These broad and ambiguous criteria give government authorities almost unchecked power to access personal data whenever they see fit.

Notably, there is no requirement for a formal, written request by the authorities, who are themselves appointed by the government. This creates a system where government-appointed agents can demand sensitive information at will, bypassing the need for individual consent and raising significant concerns about privacy and misuse of power.

Second, Rule 22 permits the government to withhold information if its disclosure is deemed to jeopardise national security or sovereignty. The phrasing – “prejudicially affect the sovereignty and integrity of India or security of the State” – is alarmingly broad and could potentially be invoked broadly and without clear, enforceable limits.

Also read: Digital Personal Data Protection Law Raises Questions About Consistency With Right to Privacy Ruling

In the past, such vague language has been used to render the state’s actions hard to challenge, and this case may be no different.

Rule 22 also does not have any safeguards for when the government requests information, which grants it broad and unfettered power without clear limitations, exceptions or oversight. This provision bypasses the safeguards established by the Supreme Court in PUCL v. Union of India (1997), which held that intercepting communications violates the constitutional right to life and personal liberty unless done through a legally established procedure.

The judgment mandated specific safeguards, including oversight by a review committee and a requirement for requests to detail the intended use of the information. Rule 22 undermines these protections, allowing government authorities unchecked access to personal data.

The other, bigger problem with Rule 22 is that it does not have a requirement for an independent review mechanism to check the legitimacy or necessity of the government’s demands for data to ensure that they are reasonable, justified or proportionate.

This leaves room for arbitrary use. In fact, without proper oversight, the rule has the potential to enable covert surveillance programs that bypass checks and balances and can lead to excessive data collection and the monitoring of ordinary citizens by the government.

Finally, there is no mechanism to challenge such requests, and data fiduciaries and intermediaries may not have an effective way to challenge such data requests from the government, potentially resulting in a surveillance state without public awareness or recourse.

We have often seen how overbroad directions for censorship have been made and required to be kept confidential under Section 69 of the IT Act, 2000. Such an opaque framework has prevented social media users from challenging the takedown of their content before court and is at the heart of the judicial challenge in the Karnataka high court where X has challenged the Union government.

The lack of transparency and the over-collection of data allows for the broad, unchecked use of data and for its potential misuse by prosecuting agencies.

For example, in the case of FIRs where police often lack the information needed to identify suspects, the data collected by the government could be wrongfully used to implicate individuals. This eliminates the need for the police to seek out information, as they already have access to it through the government’s data collection, which could be used to target individuals unjustly.

What does this mean for our privacy?

The A.P. Shah Report stressed on the need for a transparent process that includes the disclosure of surveillance to those who have been placed under it. Access to information under Section 95 of the BNSS is subject to judicial oversight, as a court order must be issued before accessing information.

In a similar vein, the guidelines issued by the Supreme Court in PUCL v. Union of India included oversight by a review committee and required interception requests to specify the intended use of the information.

However, Rule 22 appears to sidestep these safeguards entirely and bypass established protections by granting the state unfettered power under the vague grounds of the sovereignty and integrity of the nation. 

Also read: Why the Personal Data Protection Bill Won’t Stop Data Proliferation in Digital India

Complicating matters is the fact that the broad definition of a data fiduciary means it could apply to anyone, including journalists. For journalists acting as data fiduciaries, Rule 22 has profound implications, particularly in terms of their ability to safeguard sensitive information, such as the identities of sources.

This raises serious questions about the future of privacy in India. As it stands, Rule 22 opens the door for unchecked government surveillance, with minimal accountability or transparency.

A first step toward correcting this would be to introduce clear, transparent processes, including a requirement for companies to inform individuals when their data is being requested by the state.

Such requests must also conform with the standards laid down in the K.S. Puttaswamy judgment, which held that while the right to privacy is not absolute, any state intrusion must meet a three-fold requirement. This includes legality, which necessitates the existence of a law authorising the intrusion; a legitimate state aim to justify the need for such intrusion; and proportionality, ensuring a rational connection between the law’s objectives and the means adopted, thereby preventing disproportionate impacts on individual rights.

Additionally, the process should allow for a clear appeal mechanism and be subject to independent oversight.

At any rate, the provision as it stands now does not bode well for privacy in India.

Rubayya Tasneem and Injila Muslim Zaidi are fellows at the Internet Freedom Foundation.

Why Election Commission’s Explanation of Voter Mismatch Does Not Add Up

Discrepancies in as many as 538 out of 543 (99.079%) constituencies is too high a figure to be explained away by generalised and possible explanations.

On January 7, 2025, the Election Commission of India (ECI) held an hour-long press conference ostensibly to announce the dates for Delhi assembly election. Chief Election Commissioner (CEC) Rajiv Kumar, the only speaker of the event, spoke for over 41 minutes before he came “to the schedule”. 

During these minutes, he gave an explanation on the issue of voter mismatch and said the following:

“Agar machine (EVM) on nahi hui, machine me mismatch hua, agar kisi machine ke on hone me galat hua ya mock poll ka data nahi hataya gaya – sade dus lakh me 1, 2, 3, 4 jagah aisa ho sakta hai – us machine ko ek taraf rakha jata hai. (If the machine does not switch on, there’s a mismatch, there’s some wrongdoing in switching on the machine, or if the mock poll data is not erased – out of 10 and a half lakh, this can happen in 1, 2, 3 4 places – that machine will then be kept on the side.)

Jab counting poori ho jati hai toh dekha jata hai ki jo winning margin hai. Agar wo uss ek machine se kam hai toh (When the counting is over, the winning margin is checked. If that is found to be less than that one machine)… then the VVPAT slips of that machine are counted. Otherwise, it is kept aside. Therefore, that much would be counted less but it does not have any consequence as far as the result is concerned because the margins are too high. And then, Form 20 with exact details of candidates winning and losing are given to the candidates”.

This was presumably a response to a press conference by the Association for Democratic Reforms (ADR) on an analysis titled ‘Discrepancies between the votes cast and the votes counted in the 2024 Lok Sabha Election: Multiple perspectives’ organised at the Press Club of India in Delhi on July 29, 2024. The speakers of this presser included two ADR representatives, an independent senior journalist, and an academic spoke. 

Also read: Can India’s Elections be Truly Free and Fair with EVM as Deus Ex Machina?

The analysis – based on data taken from the ECI’s website – showed that there were discrepancies in the votes cast and votes counted (only in EVMs, not taking postal ballots into account) in 538 of the 543 constituencies in the 2024 Lok Sabha elections. 

The press conference was also followed by a detailed letter addressed by name to the CEC and the other two election commissioners. To date, there has been no response, not even an acknowledgment, to the letter. 

Did the ECI’s comment on voter mismatch even address the concerns?

The whole presser by the election commission lasted exactly for one hour and 11 minutes and 40 seconds. CEC Kumar’s statement – “that much would be less counted” – makes it clear that he was referring only to instances where the number of votes counted are less than the number of votes polled. 

It is worth mentioning that para 6 of the letter to the election commissioners by ADR states: 

“Overall difference between EVM votes counted and EVM votes polled: In 362 parliamentary constituencies, a total of 5,54,598 votes counted are less than the votes polled. In 176 parliamentary constituencies, a total of 35,093 votes have been counted in excess of the votes polled. Each and every vote is important and must be accounted for, hence the citizens want the ECI to state the reasons for the above stated discrepancies.”

All that the CEC did at the press conference is provide a generalised and plausible explanation for votes counted less than the votes polled – the total number of which was 5,54,598 in 362 parliamentary constituencies. 

He completely ignored a total of 35,093 votes in 176 parliamentary constituencies where the votes counted were more than the votes polled.

Also read: In 140+ LS Seats, More EVM Votes Were Counted Than EVM Votes Polled. What’s Going On?

Kumar also did not say anything new – all he did was summarise what the chief electoral officer (CEO) of UP had said on X months ago, in response to a tweet by the same academic who was a speaker at the ADR press conference.

The CEO-UP’s post read:  

“The difference can arise between votes polled and votes counted because there are certain polling stations whose votes polled are not counted as per the extant protocol issued by the Commission and provided in various Manuals and Handbooks (e.g Para 11.4 of the Handbook for Counting Agent). The polling stations whose votes polled are not counted are of two categories: 

(1) Where the Presiding Officer by mistake fails to clear the Mock Poll data from the Control Unit before starting the actual poll or he fails to remove Mock Poll slips from the VVPAT before starting the actual poll. 

(2) The total votes polled in the Control Unit does not match the record of votes in Form 17-C prepared by the Presiding Officer and who records incorrect number by mistake. 

The votes of above two categories of polling stations are counted towards the end of the counting only in the case if sum total of votes polled in all such polling stations is equal to or greater than the margin between the first and the second candidate. If it is lower than the margin then the votes are not counted at all and therefore there arises a difference between total votes polled by EVMs and votes counted.”

What is the point of a generalised explanation?

The election commission’s obliviousness to such a generalised explanation is astonishing, at the very least, because anyone who thinks about the importance of the electoral process in India – the largest democracy in the world – cannot be oblivious to this. 

Counting of votes in an election can be compared to the tallying of transactions at a branch of a bank at the end of the working day, although the comparison is not totally fair because the vote of a citizen cannot be assigned a monetary value.

Nevertheless, if the details of the bank transactions do not tally at the end of the day and there is a difference of only one rupee in the tally, the branch authority does not say that they will put in one rupee from their own pocket and complete that tallying exercise. The branch goes back to all the transactions and double-checks the record of each transaction in detail to find out where the mistake occurred, and then corrects the record.

Similarly, if there is discrepancy of even one vote in a polling booth, the ECI officials in-charge of the booth must account for that particular vote. They should tell the voters what exactly happened and how. 

When a chief electoral officer and, to top it all, the chief election commissioner, who are constitutionally responsible for the proper conduct of all the elections across the country, say it is possible that, some presiding officer by mistake failed to clear the mock poll data from the control unit before the polls or he fails to remove mock poll slips from the VVPAT before the polls, and some presiding officer recorded incorrect numbers by mistake, it is a sad commentary on the state of affairs in the democratic processes of the largest democracy in the world.

The very least that is expected from an institution that claims to be the “gold standard” in election management in the world is to provide detailed and specific explanation for each constituency – if not each polling booth – about the following:

  1. Number of votes actually cast by (a) the EVM, and (b) postal ballots
  2. Number of votes counted from (a) the EVM, and (b) postal ballots.
  3. Real number of discrepancies, if any, between points 1 and 2.
  4. Specific reasons for the discrepancies for each individual EVM, such as:
    1. How many votes or VVPAT slips (actual and specific numbers) were not removed after the mock poll, or 
    2. In which particular and specific cases did the presiding officer record wrongly in Form 17-C the total votes polled, and what were the actual number of votes recorded wrongly, or
    3. How many EVMs and which booths had problems in starting or being switched ON, as the CEC said, and what exactly was the number of votes affected by this particular false start?

A generalised and plausible explanation for such high numbers of votes being counted less, and completely overlooking 176 parliamentary constituencies where a total of 35,093 votes were counted in excess, will just not do.

Discrepancies in as many as 538 out of 543 (99.079%) constituencies is a figure that cannot be explained away by vague statements. 

Will the constitutional institution whose motto, as repeatedly described by its head, is “Disclosure, Disclosure, Disclosure” come up to these expectations? The nation awaits a response.

Jagdeep S. Chhokar is a concerned citizen of India.

Six Reasons Why Modi Is Still Silent on Manipur

Whatever may be said in criticism of Modi as a human being, or his style of governance, his decision not to visit Manipur cannot be unintended.

The latest news from Manipur is that Ajay Kumar Bhalla, the former home secretary of the Union government, is the new governor of the state. But the two other bits of news that Manipur watchers must be more eagerly waiting to hear are, one, when will our prime minister, Narendra Modi, visit the state which he has been mysteriously dodging, and two, when will the Manipur chief minister, N. Biren Singh, who has failed to quell the ethnic violence, be asked to quit.

Of the two questions, one need not attach much importance to the second – Singh’s rule rests on the mercy of the Modi government. One also cannot be sure whether he ever really ruled the state with full command.

In less than a month after the stripping incident of May 3, 2023, the then governor of Manipur, Anusuiya Uikey, on May 31, had unceremoniously disqualified him from the customary chairmanship of the unified command of the state’s security outfits. On June 17, he was excluded from the high-level security meeting on Manipur which was held in Delhi. Even in the first security conference that governor Bhalla convened after his takeover, Singh was conspicuously missing.

It is evident, therefore, that the buck stops at the desk of Prime Minister Modi and hence the question is what he is up to, or, what is behind his obstinacy not to visit Manipur at all. Is keeping Singh merely as a titular chief minister suits Modi’s politics the best?

Also read: Manipur Tapes Submitted to Commission: Did Biren Singh Authorise Use of ‘Bombs’ in the State, in Defiance of Amit Shah?

Whatever may be said in criticism of Modi as a human being, or his style of governance, one thing that will have to be conceded is that he is a master craftsman of realpolitik. If so, his decision not to visit Manipur cannot be unintended. But how to read Modi’s mind is not easy. Since unlike former Prime Ministers Jawaharlal Nehru or Manmohan Singh, both of whom had long tenures, Modi seldom gives an opportunity to anyone, even his party members, to read his mind. The only way to know it, therefore, is by making some intelligent guesses which one can attempt to do.

A recap of the crisis

But before that, a recap of the present crisis is in order. It triggered after the Manipur high court judgment of March 27, 2023 which ruled that like the Nagas and Kukis, the Meitei community should also be granted the Scheduled Tribe (ST) status. Although the judgment was soon revoked, the Kuki community had already revolted. Soon the Meiteis retaliated in greater numbers. On May 3, some rowdy elements from among them most unabashedly paraded naked some Kuki women with the obvious purpose of sending the message that Manipur belonged to the Meiteis and the Kukis were a subservient minority.

The Meitei-Kuki civil war that ensued soon resulted in about 250 deaths and 60,000 people being displaced. Militants belonging to both communities became so ferocious that even the security forces started fearing them. In February 2024, when about 200 Meitei militants stormed the residence of the additional superintendent of police and demanded the release of one of their men in custody the police had to oblige. The police conceded that if they did not, they themselves could have been ‘lynched or shot dead.’

The Myanmar connection of the conflict is also relevant. The India-Myanmar border is porous and many communities have cross-border ethnic connections, and since there is the massive issue of drug and gun running, the Manipur question is a complex one. A Hindu report dated January 25, 2024 noted: “In September 2022, authorities in Manipur pushed back 4,300… Myanmar nationals from the Moreh area…. The civil war in the neighbouring country [Myanmar] also forced some 40,000 people into Mizoram, who unlike Manipur, made them feel at home primarily due to their ethnic affiliation.”

The Indian government has toyed with the idea of fencing the India-Myanmar border which I would say is yet another flight to fantasy. India’s former Chief of the Army Staff, General M.M. Naravane, did not mince his words when he warned that besides its prohibitive cost, such a fence could serve “a useful purpose if it is kept under observation and patrolled throughout its length. Without the ability to react to any breach, a fence is of little value.”

Also read: ‘I Started Operations’: Biren Singh Allegedly Claims Credit for Conflict, ‘Kukis Filling Up Govt Posts Through ST Quota’

The Congress-BJP divide

The Congress-Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) political divide complicates the Manipur problem. To the extent that Manipur has a chequered political history in which even left adventurism had once mattered, both Congress and the BJP would have to share the blame for the mess we see today. It has been argued that while the Congress rule was known for its ‘fake encounters’, BJP has mastered the art of rampant ‘detentions’. But exonerating oneself by referring to the past mistakes of others, as Modi routinely does, for example, by referring to Nehru, is neither good politics, nor a good reading of history.

In the recently held parliamentary election in May 2024, Modi’s no-show in the state was a campaign theme. Congress did embarrass the BJP on this score and advertised, in contrast, Rahul Gandhi’s two visits to the state. After the election, in which Congress won both the Manipur seat, the party’s newly elected MP, and also a JNU professor, Angomcha Bimol Akoijam, thunderously told parliament that “I would keep quiet the moment the Prime Minister opens his mouth.”

Why is Modi dodging the Manipur question?

Returning to our central question, why is Modi not visiting Manipur or talking about it, here are my six speculative takes.

  • One, BJP is in power in Manipur and in normal circumstances the next assembly election is due in early 2027, two long years from now. Having known Modi’s penchant for electioneering, he has no reason to warm himself up now. He would take the call in all earnest at the right time.
  • Two, Manipur sends only two members to our 543-strong parliament. It makes little difference to his party in power even if these two seats go to the opposition and has already happened.
  • Three, the majority Hindu Meitei community is well entrenched in power which cannot be dislodged by other communities, whether the minority Naga or the Kuki communities, the latter even less. They are just 16% of the population compared to 53% Meiteis and 20% Nagas. Moreover, the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS) has been extremely active in the entire Northeast, right from the time of India’s independence. (It may be interesting to note that the first chief minister of Manipur after it became a state in the Indian Union in 1972 was a Muslim, Mohammed Alimuddin.)
  • Four, there is a huge illicit drug and narcotic economy in the region which is endemic to the entire broader region of India, much more so in the areas abutting Myanmar and by extension, Thailand. It is common knowledge that any ruling party in these critical northeastern states takes advantage of this illegal trade for their party funding. Since the BJP is ruling Manipur, that may have something to do with it.
  • Five, more tension in the area means more demand in the rest of the country for border fencing between India and Myanmar. Fencing is the easiest option ordinary people understand to tackle international migrations and the drug trade. There is a huge mechanism of contract allotment and doling out of political favours associated with these deals which an unsuspecting common man seldom understands.
  • Six, it is surmised that behind the dogged determination of the Modi government not to grant autonomy to the Kukis is corporate India’s greedy eyes on the forest and other natural resources of the areas which form their habitat. The nexus between Modi and some of India’s leading corporate giants is common knowledge.

To conclude, given the geography of Manipur and the security dynamics of the region, the Modi government must politically respond to contain the strife before it goes beyond control. It must be underlined that the annual report 2023-24 of the Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA) has noted that Manipur accounts for 77% of the violent cases attributed to the entire Northeast.

To drive home the point in a better way, a comparative analysis may help. Of the Northeast’s total population of 45,709,443, Manipur’s population is 2,855,794, just 6.24%. Of Northeast’s total area of 264,331 sq km, Manipur accounts for 22,327 sq km, just 8.44%. Of the 26 MPs from Northeast, Manipur sends merely 2, which is just 7.7%.

About six months ago, on July 3, 2024, Modi explained to the Rajya Sabha the historical roots of the situation of Manipur. But by typically battering the Congress for all that had gone wrong in the state he cut a sorry figure. The Hindu editorial three days laters was spot on: “Bluster and mere acknowledgment of the crisis will not solve the problems in Manipur and Mr. Modi has to become proactive in leading changes.”

It is sad to note that the same explanation is now being parroted by chief minister Singh. In response to the alarming figures supplied in the MHA report, he said “sorry to the people of the state for what happened since May 3 last year [2023] … and [that he] would like to apologise to all natives.”  But just within a couple of days he was back on the game with conventional gusto. He held the Congress responsible for the conflict.

Partha S. Ghosh is a retired professor of South Asian studies at JNU.

This piece was first published on The India Cable – a premium newsletter from The Wire & Galileo Ideas – and has been updated and republished here. To subscribe to The India Cable, click here.

Smriti Irani, Shekhar Kapur Among New Faces on PM Museum’s Executive Council

Educationist Chamu Krishna Shastry, who was a chief contributor in the formulation of the controversial National Education Policy (NEP); and archaeologist K.K. Mohammad, a former regional director of the Archaeological Survey of India, are also part of the new team.

New Delhi: The Union government has reconstituted the society and executive council of the Prime Ministers’ Museum and Library (PMML) with several new faces, according to a notification issued by the Union Culture Ministry.

While former principal secretary to Prime Minister, Nripendra Mishra, got another five year term as the organisation’s chairperson, the new entrants include former Union minister Smriti Irani, former NITI Aayog vice-chairman Rajiv Kumar, retired Army General Syed Ata Hasnain, filmmaker Shekhar Kapur and Sanskar Bharati’s Vasudev Kamath.

The council earlier had 29 members while now it has been expanded to 34 members.

Interestingly, other new members are Sanjeev Sanyal, a member of the economic advisory council to the prime minister; educationist Chamu Krishna Shastry, who was a chief contributor in the formulation of the controversial National Education Policy (NEP); archaeologist K.K. Mohammad, a former regional director of the Archaeological Survey of India, who was part of the Babri Masjid excavation team in 1976, as well as archeologist B.R. Mani, who currently heads the National Museum.

Prime Minister Narendra Modi is the president of the NMML society and defence minister Rajnath Singh is the vice president.

Meanwhile, Raghvendra Tanwar, chairperson of the Indian Council of Historical Research, and Sachidanand Joshi, chairperson of the IGNCA and lyricist and admaker Prasoon Joshi are also part of the society.

Earlier known as the Nehru Memorial Museum & Library Society, the museum was renamed as the Prime Ministers’ Museum and Library Society in June 2023 to “reflect the present activities which now also include a Sangrahalaya depicting the collective journey of democracy in Independent India and highlighting the contribution of each Prime Minister in nation-building”.

The renaming was criticised by the opposition Congress, which accused Modi of having a single point agenda of “denying”, “distorting”, “defaming” and “destroying” the Nehruvian legacy.

Manmohan Singh’s Family Seeks Clarity on Centre’s Proposal For Memorial: Report

The Centre has proposed that the memorial for Singh is built at a specific site at the Rashtriya Smriti Sthal.

New Delhi: Family members of former Prime Minister Manmohan Singh have said that it needed more time to consider how to create a meaningful memorial for the leader, who recently passed away.

“The government has earmarked a specific site within the Rashtriya Smriti Sthal where our family may wish to construct and manage a suitable memorial for Dr Manmohan Singh,” his daughter Daman Singh told The Tribune.

She said that the family had sought clarity on the issue of the memorial for Singh as it needs to understand the precise terms and conditions for Centre’s proposal.

“In fact, we have asked the government for certain clarifications and are waiting for a response. We need some more time to think seriously about how to create a meaningful memorial for him,” said Daman Singh.

The family has said that it hardly had the time to grieve since the passing away of Singh on December 26.

The Centre has proposed that the memorial for Singh is built at a specific site at the Rashtriya Smriti Sthal. The Rashtriya Smriti Sthal is is located at the Samadhis Complex near Ekta Sthal in New Delhi and memorials of former Prime Ministers I.K. Gujral and Atal Bihari Vajpayee are also situated in the same area.

Will the Modi Govt Fix the Economy With the Union Budget 2025?

The previous terms of this government have been heavily centred on raising capital expenditure at the cost of essential welfare spending.

This is the first part of a series of macro-analyses by the InfoSphere team of the Centre for New Economics Studies (CNES). 

As various stakeholders gear up for the Union Budget 2025–26 , the atmosphere is charged with uncertainty, considering recent economic headwinds and the economy’s troubling growth trajectory. 

Despite the optimism that accompanied the beginning of the fiscal year, growth unexpectedly slowed in the second quarter to 5.4%, with the economy grappling with a slew of challenges – sluggish capital formation, weakening consumer demand and the ripple effects of adverse weather conditions. These factors have cast a shadow over the otherwise resilient trajectory that India has been on – making this budget a critical moment for steering the economy back on track.

This year’s budget is widely expected to take a more aggressive stance on attracting both foreign and domestic investments to improve public health infrastructure among other critical sectors. In ten years of the Modi government, this aggressive posturing, banking on capex-fueled government spending, hasn’t worked. 

One may expect a slew of new factor market reforms and/or state-designed incentives designed to position India as a magnet for private capital, while also encouraging homegrown enterprises to expand.

Low consumption demand, stagnant real wages

Such measures are seen as essential for reviving the economic momentum and sustaining long-term growth. However, low urban consumption demand, weak growth in real wages across sectors and a constant state of high unemployment has translated into poor performative metrics for domestic private capital expansion.

It is hoped that this year’s Union Budget offers more substantive support for the MSME sector and industrial clusters that form the backbone of India’s manufacturing and service industries and the labor-intensive employment it offers. The pandemic’s scars and recent economic tremors mean that targeted incentives and reforms in this space could prove pivotal for job creation and broader economic stability. 

Additionally, with the middle classes being squeezed from taxes (from both direct and indirect), long-awaited tax breaks are essential for boosting disposable incomes and reigniting consumer confidence, especially in urban areas where consumption demand is weak. With household budgets stretched thin, the common citizen is eagerly awaiting policy measures that can ease financial strain and fuel spending. 

Also read: The Indian Economy Is Being ‘Destabilised’ by Cronyism, Not Hindenburg or Soros

In the fiscal landscape, Q3 saw dwindling net exports, with the current account deficit widening to 2.8% of GDP – a disappointing deviation from the projected 2%. Sluggish growth was most apparent in manufacturing, while mining reported net negative growth.

At the same time, consumer demand has remained fragile. Reports from Nomura underline growing household balance sheet stress, with rising income disparities and limited savings deepening India’s cyclical slowdown. While urban demand shows some signs of recovery, rural consumption continues to face significant strain due to inflationary pressures and erratic monsoons. Reinvigorating consumer confidence through measures such as tax breaks or direct support could be key to addressing these economic hurdles.

Source- CEIC Data

The problem of GST

Since its implementation, GST collection has not met the promised growth. The average monthly growth rate from April 2022 to October 2024 was only 0.86%. This marks a contrast with the promised 14% annual growth in state revenue with the introduction of GST.

With the end of the compensation mechanism in 2022, many states face significant fiscal constraints which have increased their financial difficulties. The state also had to cede approximately 44% of their taxation rights with the imposition of GST, resulting in a reduction in fiscal autonomy for states over their tax policies. It has also reduced the flexibility that states enjoyed in the pre-GST era, when they were able to adjust tax rates according to their states’ economic conditions. 

Source: EAC-PM working paper, MoSPI

A report by the National Stock Exchange highlights a critical revenue disparity among Indian states, with some states showing revenue growth. The inter-state disparity remains huge in FY25 BE, with most states budgeting a slower growth except Telangana, Karnataka, Jharkhand and Uttar Pradesh. Several states from the eastern and northern side – such as Himachal Pradesh, Assam, Mizoram and Meghalaya – are showing signs of slower revenue growth and have budgeted a contraction or minimal growth in their revenue receipts.

The capex conundrum

The new infrastructure thrust in India is well reflected in the heavy capex provided by the government. The National Infrastructure Pipeline chalks out an ambitious investment plan to the tune of Rs 111 lakh crore or US$ 1.4 trillion from 2020 to 2025. The plan is targeted at energy, roads, railways and urban development.

 

Sector-wise break-up of capital expenditure. Fiscals 2020-2025. Source: National Infrastructure Pipeline

The government retained an all-time high infrastructure spending target of Rs 11.11 trillion in the fiscal year 2024-25, accounting for 3.4% of the GDP.

Despite these investments, the expected multiplier effects on employment and private investment have been few and far between. According to the National Statistics Office, the share of gross fixed capital formation (GFCF), a proxy for infrastructure investment, is likely to decline to 30.1% of GDP in FY25 from 30.8% in FY24. Growth in investment demand is also set to decelerate to 6.4% in FY25 from 9% in the previous fiscal year.

Source: Indian budget document

Above all, the creation of jobs is a source of concern. The unemployment rate according to the government was only 3.2% in the 2022-23 fiscal year, much lower than an already historically low rate of unemployment in the United States The private think-tank, Center for Monitoring Indian Economy said unemployment in May was 7.0%, up from around 6% before the pandemic, and rose to 9.2% in June 2024.

Additionally, the expected crowding-in effect on private investment has been slow. While public investment has been strong, private capital expenditure has not kept pace, raising concerns about the sustainability of growth driven predominantly by public funds. This gets more complicated on account of fiscal constraints. 

Without adequately matching revenue upwards, continuing high levels of public capex risks blowing out fiscal deficits, which in turn can hurt economic stability. On top of the issues regarding finances, the biggest challenges lie in the area of implementation like delays in project approval and land acquisition.

While the improved capex and infrastructure investments in India are commendable, significant gaps in implementation, job generation and stirring of private investments have to be overcome to realise the complete potential of these investments.

Increasing capex at the cost of welfarism

Many of the already existing social sector schemes for public and private goods, that have been there since the UPA times, have simply been renamed without any substantial justifications or changes. 

The fund allocation to the schemes has remained stagnant or declined, leaving a sense of precarity among the populace eager to be included under various welfare schemes. Thomas Piketty in 1995 emphasised on the role of redistributive policies for better social mobility.

Recent data underscores the persistence of inequality, with the K-shaped recovery noted by Nomura, indicating a widening gap between high-income and low-income households. While higher-income groups are benefiting from asset appreciation and easier credit access, middle- and lower-income groups continue to grapple with high inflation and limited disposable income. This disparity has further stressed rural demand, with FMCG sales (fast moving consumer goods) in rural areas declining. 

Electoral outcomes shouldn’t merely serve as a referendum on unmet promises, especially with youth unemployment at a troubling 10-13%. This reality challenges the broader narrative of “acche din,” which oscillates between potential and palpable discontent, weakening the political juggernaut and its optics-driven growth model.

On one hand, policies prioritise liberalisation, privatisation and globalisation (LPG), while on the other, public perception is managed through high-visibility projects and carefully crafted narratives. While global image management and rebranding aren’t harmful, they shouldn’t come at the cost of the immobility of its own poor.

Source: Budget estimates

Fiscal choices alone can’t decide the fate of its citizenry if the political will is unsound. Exclusion will prevail in the strides of progress if the government continues to reduce allocations to critical social security schemes. Underfunding welfare schemes risks further alienating lower-income groups, especially in rural areas, where these programs act as critical safety nets.

‘Churning poverty’ underscores the fragility of the gains of over 18.1% of households that escaped poverty between 2011 and 2024. Over 5% of these households slipped back into poverty due to shocks such as health crises – with rising medical expenses accounting for 60% of rural indebtedness – job losses, or agricultural distress caused by erratic monsoons, IHDS data highlights, 

Two full terms of the Modi government have shown how its fiscal roadmap has been limited in scope while being too heavily centred on raising capital expenditure at the cost of essential welfare spending.

Schemes for the upward mobility of all segments of the citizenry remain heavily compromised, while electorally sensitive, entitlement-based measures are often highlighted in the name of welfarism. For example, the free ration offered to 80 million people is framed as a step towards upward mobility.

In his third elected term, while there is limited change expected in the Union government’s fiscal strategy, it may be prudent for the government to realise its shortcomings. The government needs to acknowledge its own follies and undertake structural course-correction to shape a longer-term fiscal roadmap for securing development for all. 

Deepanshu Mohan is a Professor of Economics, Dean, IDEAS, and Director, Centre for New Economics Studies. He is a Visiting Professor at London School of Economics and an Academic Visiting Fellow to AMES, University of Oxford.

Ankur Singh, Aditi Verma, Bliash Dey, Sarthak Ojha and Theresa Jose are all Research Assistants with the InfoSphere team of Centre for New Economics Studies (CNES).