Prevailing situation in country worse than time of Emergency: Lalu Prasad Yadav
The former Bihar chief minister was speaking to reporters here before leaving for Sasaram for Congress leader's 'Voter Adhikar Yatra', which kicks off on Sunday in Rohtas district.
"We are fighting a battle against the prevailing situation in the country, which is worse than what it was during the Emergency. It is good that Rahul Gandhi is also with us, " Prasad, accompanied by his son Tejashwi Yadav, said.
The 1,300 km-long 'Voter Adhikar Yatra' will cover over 20 districts in Bihar.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Indian Express
27 minutes ago
- Indian Express
BJP MLC slams cow vigilantes, says anti-slaughter Act is against farmers
Days after Deputy Chief Minister Ajit Pawar held a meeting with top police officials on the growing menace of gaurakshaks (self-styled cow vigilantes), ruling Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) MLC and farmer leader Sadabhau Khot on Sunday said that the Maharashtra Animal Preservation (Amendment) Act, 2015, that prevents the slaughter of cow, bulls and bullocks is against farmers. Speaking to The Indian Express, Khot said, 'Let's be very clear. No farmer would part ways with productive cows. Dairy is a supplementary business of lakhs of farmers in the state. The earning from this is now being spent on taking care of unproductive animals as transfer of these animals is not only banned but under threat from these so-called gaurakshaks. The Act (against cow slaughter) is actually turning against farmers…' About cow vigilantism in the state, he said, 'These gaurakshaks resort to extortion from genuine farmers and traders, bringing the transport of animals to a complete standstill.' Khot, a farmer leader from western Maharashtra's Sangli district, said that as a farmer leader he feels that if the present act (to prevent cow slaughter) threatens the livelihood of farmers, then it should be 'torn apart'. 'This (the act) is not even helping desi cows as those are getting replaced by Jersey cows. The transfer of newer breeds from different states has totally stopped due to fear of these cow vigilantes. The so-called gaushalas (cow shelters promoted by the state government) should pay the market price to farmers for unproductive cows and must come forward to rescue the farmers,' he said, adding that he was 'ready to pay any price' for his stand. Last week, The Indian Express had reported that Deputy Chief Minister and Nationalist Congress Party (NCP) chief Ajit Pawar held a meeting with top police officials in the state over the demands raised by the Qureishi community, which has been complaining against cow vigilantes who allegedly beat up and extort money from animal traders. Following the meeting, state police issued a circular, clarifying that private individuals have no authority to inspect vehicles that transport animals but only police can act against them. Terming the circular issued by Maharashtra police an eyewash, Maharashtra Congress spokesperson Sachin Sawant said, 'The circular says that only police can take action against illegal animal trade. But it does not say what action will be taken against the private individuals if they are take law in their hands? The majority of these so called cow vigilantes are linked to BJP and RSS and this issue is used for the politics of polarisation.'
The Wire
29 minutes ago
- The Wire
Oath from Rahul, Not BJP; No Numbers of 'Illegal' Immigrants, Forms with Documents: EC's Seven Non-Answers
New Delhi: Facing criticism from opposition parties over allegations of 'vote theft' and the contentious special intensive revision (SIR) of electoral rolls in poll-bound Bihar, in which 65 lakh electors have been left out of the draft voter rolls, Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar addressed his first press conference on Sunday (August 17). In the over one-hour-long press conference, Kumar did not provide any answers to why the Election Commission (EC) is asking for an affidavit under oath from Lok Sabha leader of opposition Rahul Gandhi over his allegations of over one lakh votes being stolen in Karnataka's Mahadevapura assembly constituency in the 2024 Lok Sabha elections, but not from BJP MP Anurag Thakur, who also alleged irregularities in voter rolls in Rae Bareli, Wayanad, Diamond Harbour and Kannauj, asking Gandhi, Priyanka Gandhi Vadra, Abhishek Banerjee and Akhilesh Yadav to resign as Lok Sabha MPs. Kumar also did not provide any answers to questions on how many enumeration forms in Bihar had been submitted along with the requisite documents and how many foreign undocumented immigrants were found during the SIR, as well as to allegations of whether the exercise is being used to usher in the National Register of Citizens in the state. While Kumar in response to a question on why the SIR is being conducted so close to assembly elections and that too during the flood season said that the last iteration of the exercise in 2003 was also held in July, he skipped mentioning that assembly polls were not due until October 2005. Instead, Kumar laced his answers in the press conference with rhetoric, sought to explain electors' names listed with their house numbers as zero as a 'joke' on the poor, and claimed that an elector's name appearing multiple times does not imply vote theft or that they have voted more than once. He even issued an ultimatum to Gandhi, asking him to furnish his affidavit on oath within seven days or apologise to the nation. Here's a look at seven points from the CEC's press conference that amounted to non-answers. Affidavit demanded from Gandhi but not from BJP Kumar began his press conference by stating that for the EC, there is no 'paksh or vipaksh ' (ruling party or opposition). 'For the EC, there are no ruling parties or opposition; all are equal. Irrespective of who it is from any political party, the EC will not back down from its constitutional duties,' he said. However, Kumar went on to say in the presser that Gandhi's allegations against the poll body are 'baseless' and demanded an affidavit from him. 'If a complaint comes in view of a voter, the EC examines it. But if the accusation is about 1.5 lakh voters, then should we send notices to 1.5 lakh voters without any evidence or affidavit? Will this be legal? There is no evidence in law or affidavit. Should we call 1.5 lakh voters to the SDM [sub-divisional magistrate]'s office and tell them they are fake voters? Will voters not ask for evidence? Without any evidence, the names of valid voters will not be cut,' said Kumar. He continued: 'The EC is standing like a shield with each voter. If one thinks that by giving a PPT with wrong analysis and facts, and saying that 'this woman has voted twice', the EC will act, then it cannot act without an affidavit in such a serious matter, it would be against the law and the constitution.' Gandhi in his press conference on August 7 had alleged 'collusion' between the BJP and the poll body and showed the EC's electoral rolls as proof to claim that over one lakh votes were stolen in Mahadevapura. Kumar was asked by reporters about why the EC is not asking for an affidavit from BJP MP Thakur for his claims against fellow Lok Sabha MPs Gandhi (Rae Bareli), Vadra (Wayanad), Yadav (Kannauj) and Banerjee (Diamond Harbour). However, he did not provide any reply about why an affidavit was not being sought from the BJP MP. Citing rule 20(3)(b) selectively In seeking an affidavit from Gandhi, without naming him, Kumar focused on rule 20(3)(b) of the Registration of Electors Rules, 1960. 'If you are a voter of that constituency, you can fill Form 6, 7 and 8 through booth-level officers within the specified time. But if you are not an elector of that constituency, then you have only one remedy under law, which is Rule 20(3)(b). 'This says that if you are not an elector of that constituency, you can lodge your complaint as a witness. You will have to give an oath to the electoral registration officer and that oath will have to be administered in front of the person against whom you have complained.' The Wire has earlier reported that rule 20(3)(b) applies to claims and objections raised after the preparation of draft rolls following a revision exercise by the EC. Gandhi's allegations relating to the Mahadevapura constituency in the 2024 Lok Sabha elections do not come under the purview of rule 20(3)(b), experts said, as over a year has passed since the election was held. Kumar did not mention that rule 20(3)(b) applies to claims and objections raised after the preparation of the draft rolls following a revision exercise. Instead, in a reference to Gandhi, he said that if errors are not raised within 45 days, it is to 'mislead the public'. 'If you do not raise a complaint against errors in the electoral rolls within a period of prescribed 45 days, and then go on to use wrong words like 'vote chori [theft]', is it not a way to mislead the public? It also shows disrespect towards India's constitution. What is it, if not this?' he said. In an unprecedented move, Kumar also demanded an apology from Gandhi within seven days. 'Give an oath or apologise to the nation. There is no third option. If we don't get an affidavit within seven days, this would mean that all these allegations are baseless and the person who is saying 'our voters are fraud' should apologise.' 2003 SIR conducted in July, skips mention of no polls that year Kumar sought to respond to questions on the timing of the SIR in Bihar – at a time so close to the elections and when the state is prone to monsoon-induced floods – and said that when the exercise was last conducted in 2003, it was also held in July. 'The question has come that why should it be done in July when the weather is not good. I want to let you know that in Bihar when the SIR was conducted in 2003, it was done from July 14 to August 14. Then also it was done successfully, and now too, all enumeration forms have been collected,' said Kumar. He did not, however, mention that assembly polls in Bihar were not scheduled to be held in 2003. In March 2000, now-chief minister from the Janata Dal (United) Nitish Kumar resigned a day before a floor test was due in the assembly, and the Rashtriya Janata Dal's Rabri Devi was sworn in as chief minister. She continued in office till the assembly elections in 2005. The Wire has reported that the order for the 2003 SIR remains unavailable and cannot be cross-checked for reference of the entire duration of the exercise in that year, but it would transpire that the SIR process was started well before the assembly elections were due to be held in 2005. Kumar also did not answer questions about an intensive revision order in 2004, in which the EC had then said that assembly polls were due later that year in Arunachal Pradesh and Maharashtra and therefore the revision in these states would take place after the elections. The Wire has seen a copy of that order. The poll chief said that the law lays down that a revision exercise must be undertaken before every election. While a summary revision was conducted in Bihar in January this year, it would not be sufficient for the polls that are due in November, and thus July was decided as the qualifying date, he added. No answers on illegal immigrants While announcing the SIR in Bihar on June 24, the EC said that the exercise was necessary for various reasons, among which was the inclusion of 'foreign illegal immigrants' in the electoral rolls. The EC had earlier said through 'sources' to some media outlets that an unspecified number of illegal immigrants from Nepal, Myanmar and Bangladesh were found in the rolls. While a question was asked in the press conference about the number of such undocumented immigrants found, Kumar did not provide any figure. 'I want to make it clear that according to the Constitution of India, only Indian citizens can vote for elections for MPs and MLAs. People from other countries do not have the right. If such people have filled out the enumeration form, then during the SIR process they will have to prove their nationality by submitting some documents, which are being examined till September 30. Those who are not Indian citizens will be found and they will not be included as voters,' he said. He also did not provide any answers to whether the SIR exercise was being used to usher in a National Register of Citizens. No clear answer on number of enumeration forms received with verification documents The EC has said that at the end of the SIR stage devoted to collecting enumeration forms on July 25, 99.8% of forms had been collected from electors. While a major point of contention in the present exercise is the list of 11 documents the commission is seeking from electors as proof of their eligibility, Kumar did not provide any clear answers about the number of forms that had been received with the eligible documents, or why there was a distinction now between electors 'recommended' and 'not recommended' by booth-level officers. 'In the ongoing SIR process in Bihar, documents from how many people have been received, how many have been recommended and what each booth-level officer recommended–the attempt to collect this data is ongoing. The EC is working on a multi-level construct,' said Kumar. 'First there is the booth level officer, then the booth-level supervisor, then the SDM, then the DM and then the chief electoral officer. Neither the EC nor anyone else can add any vote without following the legal process. You have to understand that under this decentralised construct, how many documents have been taken or not, is still ongoing at the SDM level. This will come out, and to say anything in advance would not be correct.' House number zero While reports have emerged showing that several voters in Bihar's elector rolls have their house numbers listed as zero, Kumar said that questioning such entries amounted to a joke on poor voters. 'Many people do not have a home but their names are in the voter rolls. What is their address given as, then? The address given is that place where they go to sleep at night; sometimes on the side of the road, sometimes under a bridge, sometimes beside a lamp-post. And if it is said that they are fake voters, it amounts to playing a big joke on our poor voters, sisters, brothers and elders,' he said. 'Crores' of people have their addresses listed as zero because their panchayats or municipalities have not numbered their homes, Kumar said, adding that the EC provides 'notional numbers' to such electors which is 'displayed as zero on the computer'. 'This doesn't mean they are not electors.' Electoral roll and voting different While Gandhi had alleged that there were instances where the same voter was enlisted in several polling booths, Kumar said that one voter can only vote once despite their name being present multiple times. He did not provide any answers to why an elector's name was appearing multiple times in the electoral rolls in the first place. Gandhi had showed various examples in his August 7 press conference where electors were found to appear multiple times in the electoral rolls in different booths. A voter 'can only vote once. How is it vote theft if their name is there twice in the electoral rolls? It is not possible. Each voter can only vote once. This is why we said that EC data has been analysed wrongly and being said that electoral rolls are wrong and therefore voting was wrong-electoral rolls and voting are different,' said Kumar.
The Hindu
29 minutes ago
- The Hindu
File affidavit in seven days or apologise: ECI ultimatum on Rahul Gandhi's Karnataka vote theft allegations
The Election Commission of India (ECI) on Sunday (August 17, 2025) doubled down on its demand that Leader of Opposition Rahul Gandhi submit an affidavit stating his allegations of voter roll manipulations in a Karnataka Assembly constituency. Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar also refused the Opposition's demands to publish a machine-readable voter list and to provide CCTV footage of the voting process, claiming that both measures would violate voter privacy. In his first press conference since assuming office, the CEC did not name the Congress leader, but issued him an ultimatum to submit a signed affidavit within seven days or apologise to the nation for his allegations. CEC hits back This comes ten days after Mr. Gandhi alleged deliberate, large-scale discrepancies in the voter rolls of the Mahadevapura Assembly segment of the Bangalore Central Lok Sabha constituency, which was won by the BJP in the 2024 general election. Following his explosive allegations made in a press conference, the offices of the Chief Electoral Officers of Karnataka, Maharashtra, and Haryana had asked Mr. Gandhi to submit his allegations under oath, which he has refused to do. Asked why the ECI has not taken suo motu cognisance of the allegations made by the Congress, a combative CEC said, 'If accusations are made against 1,50,000 people, then should all these voters be given notices without any evidence?' 'You have to give an affidavit or apologise to the nation. If within seven days affidavit is not given, then it means allegations are wrong,' he said. What are the challenges confronting the EC? | Explained 'No discrimination between parties' However, Mr. Kumar did not reply to a question on why BJP MP Anurag Thakur — who has made similar allegations of voter roll discrepancies in the Rae Bareli Lok Sabha constituency, which is represented by Mr. Gandhi — was not asked to submit an affidavit as well. To another question on why a complaint filed by the Biju Janata Dal in Odisha about last year's Lok Sabha election had not been probed, Mr. Kumar clarified that the complaint was not made under oath, adding that the 45-day limit for complaints has also passed. He had a similar response to a complaint filed by Samajwadi Party chief Akhilesh Yadav. The CEC began the press conference by asserting that the ECI cannot discriminate among political parties, insisting that it considers ruling and Opposition parties as equal. 'Insult to the Constitution' He said that it was an insult to the Constitution if election petitions are not filed within 45 days, but allegations of 'vote chori' (vote theft) are later raised. 'According to law, if errors in the voter list are not reported in time, if an election petition is not filed in the High Court within 45 days of a voter choosing their candidate, and then misleading attempts are made to confuse people by using wrong words such as 'vote theft', then what else can this be if not an insult to the Constitution of India?' he asked. 'More than one crore employees are engaged in the election exercise. Can 'vote chori' happen in such a transparent process?' he added. Mr. Kumar sought to dismiss any doubts about the 2024 election. 'How can someone steal votes' in such a scenario, he asked, adding that 'neither the ECI nor any voter is afraid of such baseless accusations'. On the accusations made by the Opposition regarding the Maharashtra Assembly election, he said, 'When the results came, suddenly they remembered that the rolls were wrong? No objection with evidence has been filed against any voter with the Maharashtra CEO. The elections happened eight months ago. Why no election petition was filed? It was said, 'Why so much polling in the last hours. Every hour, there was 10% polling, and in the last hour, there was less than 10% polling. Telling something repeatedly does not mean it will become true. Sun rises in the east and it will not rise in the west just because someone says so.'
