Bihar poll officials reject Rahul Gandhi's claims on voter deletion
Gandhi highlighted their cases during his ongoing state-wide 'Voter Adhikar Yatra', which began on August 17.
Nawada district magistrate Ravi Prakash, in a post on X, called Kumar's allegation 'baseless and untrue', stating that his name was never recorded in the electoral roll. In Gandhi's video, Kumar, a farmer, alleged that his name was struck off the electoral rolls despite him having voted in the 2025 Lok Sabha elections, where he also acted as a polling agent.
Prakash clarified that Kumar's name did not feature in the Warisaliganj constituency's rolls — in the 2024 summary revision, the 2025 supplementary list, or the August 1 draft. While other family members were transferred between polling stations 9 and 10, Kumar's name was absent throughout. He added that Kumar's name never appeared in the deleted electors' list displayed at booths under Supreme Court orders.
Although present when the booth-level officer affixed the list, Kumar did not file any objection or Form-6 request despite being asked to do so. 'If he submits Form-6 with the required declaration, his name will be included as per rules,' Prakash said.
Meanwhile, the electoral registration officer of Rohtas' 207-Chenari constituency rejected claims by Ranju Devi, who alleged in Gandhi's video that her family's names were deleted from the draft rolls published on August 1.
The officer's inquiry confirmed that eight family members were listed at booths 342 and 343. Later, television channels showed Devi admitting she had been misinformed by her ward secretary, who wrongly told her their names were missing from the voter list during the SIR exercise.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Hindu
14 minutes ago
- The Hindu
TDP and JD(U) support the Bills but express reservation about several ‘grey areas' in the legislations
Two key National Democratic Alliance partners, the Janata Dal (United) and Telugu Desam Party, expressed support for three Bills that seek to remove the Prime Minister, Chief Ministers and Ministers from office if they are 'arrested and detained in custody on account of serious criminal charges', while also underlining reservations about 'grey areas' in the legislations. The allies hoped their concerns would be addressed during scrutiny of the Bills in the Parliament's Joint Committee. Home Minister Amit Shah moved the constitutional amendment Bills in the Lok Sabha, along with a resolution to send them to the Parliament's Joint Committee. According to sources, the allies were neither informed nor consulted about these Bills, which were circulated late on Tuesday night to Lok Sabha members. Speaking to The Hindu, the TDP's Parliamentary Party leader Lavu Sri Krishna Devarayalu said that these legislations are in the right direction. Listing out the 'coal block allocation, 2G spectrum allocation, AgustaWestland Helicopter procurement and Adarsh Housing scams', Mr. Devarayalu said, 'The country has moved away from the United Progressive Alliance [UPA] era, when such cases made regular headlines. Since 2014, we haven't had such cases… we may not have perfected the system but we have definitely bettered it. No Chief Minister or Minister should run the administration from jail. These legislations are in the right direction.' At the same time, he said that legislation should not be 'misused'. 'There are grey areas that need to be addressed and the Bills should be studied at length, which we believe will be done at Parliament's Joint Committee. We have to ensure that it is not misused,' he said. Secretary General and spokesperson of Janata Dal (United) K.C. Tyagi said that the legislation is aimed to ensure probity in public life. 'This should be implemented without any bias,' he said. He also rejected the Congress's claim that these Bills will be used by the government to target its own allies like the JD(U). 'No corruption charge has ever been levelled against Bihar Chief Minister Nitish Kumar. I reject the Congress's claim that the Bills are aimed at us. They are aimed at the corrupt and there is nothing wrong with it,' he said. The government had moved three Bills — the Government of Union Territories (Amendment) Bill, 2025; the Constitution (One Hundred And Thirtieth Amendment) Bill, 2025; and the Jammu and Kashmir Reorganisation (Amendment) Bill, 2025. The Bills propose the removal of the Prime Minister, Chief Ministers, and Ministers of the Centre and State governments if are arrested and detained in custody for 30 consecutive days for offences that attract a jail term of at least five years.
The Hindu
14 minutes ago
- The Hindu
Constitution (130th Amendment) Bill aims to end country's democratic era, says Mamata
West Bengal Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee on Wednesday (August 20, 2025) condemned the introduction of the Constitution (130th Amendment) Bill, 2025 in Parliament, calling it 'something that is more than a super-Emergency, a step to end the democratic era of India forever'. In a social media post, Ms. Banerjee said the Bill trampled upon the basic structure of the Constitution and sought to empower the 'Union to intrude upon the mandate of the people, handing sweeping powers to unelected authorities (ED, CBI — whom the Supreme Court has described as 'caged parrots') to interfere in the functioning of elected State governments'. She added that the Bill was a step to empower the Prime Minister and the Union Home Minister 'in a sinister manner at the expense of the basic principles of our Constitution'. Union Home Minister Amit Shah on Wednesday (August 20, 2025) introduced three Bills in the Lok Sabha, including the Constitution (130th Amendment) Bill, which has provisions for the removal of the Prime Minister, Chief Ministers and Ministers if jailed or detained for 30 days for crimes punishable by five years or more. The Bills were sent to the joint committee of the Lok Sabha for examination. Pointing out that the intent of the Bill was to consolidate a system of 'one man, one party, one government', the Trinamool Congress chairperson said the Bill must be resisted at any cost and democracy must be saved at this moment. 'The Bill strikes at the basic structure of the Constitution — federalism, separation of powers, and judicial review — principles that even Parliament cannot override. If allowed to pass, it will be a death warrant for constitutional governance in India. We must resist this dangerous overreach. Our Constitution is not the property of those in temporary seats of power. It belongs to the people of India,' Ms. Banerjee said. She said the Bill was not aimed at any reform but a regression towards a system where the law no longer rests with independent courts but was placed in the hands of vested interests and an attempt to establish a rule where judicial scrutiny was silenced, constitutional safeguards were dismantled and the people's rights were trampled. 'This is how authoritarian regimes, even fascist ones in history, consolidated power. It reeks of the very mindset that the world once condemned in the darkest chapters of the 20th century,' she added. Later in the day, Trinamool Congress general secretary Abhishek Banerjee said the Constitution (130th Amendment) Bill, 2025 would never pass as it required the support of two-third MPs of the House. Mr. Banerjee, who is the leader of the party in the Lok Sabha, told journalists that the Bill was aimed to divert the attention of the people from SIR (Special Intensive Revision) in Bihar. The Trinamool leader said if the BJP leadership could introduce such a Bill with 240 seats then the apprehensions that they want to change the Constitution was correct. 'Having failed in its attempt to misuse the EC to implement special intensive revision (SIR), the government has now activated another 'E' — ED — to bring in laws that target opposition leaders, crush democracy and manipulate the people's mandate by toppling State governments,' the Diamond Harbour MP said on social media. Speaking to media persons, Ms. Banerjee said 'we will strongly take up the matter of women MPs of Trinamool Congress being assaulted during the proceedings of the Parliament with the Speaker of Lok Sabha.'
Hindustan Times
14 minutes ago
- Hindustan Times
Looking for the forest, losing the way in lexicon
Should the State's understanding of what constitutes forests be a matter of semantic jugglery? Haryana seems to think so, holding the 'dictionary definition' of forests to mean areas with 40% canopy density spread over at least five hectares if isolated or at least two hectares if contiguous with government-notified forests. Its excuse is that the Supreme Court last year directed states to use the dictionary definition of forests in the broad sense for identifying forests, as established in the 1996 Godavarman judgment. While the Oxford Learner's Dictionary defines forest as a large area of land that is thickly covered with trees, Haryana seems to have adopted a very restrictive, literal understanding of the same, ignoring its particular vegetation context. As a consequence, vast tracts of the Aravallis will now be left out of protection under the Forest Conservation Act (FCA). The vegetation has adapted to the scant rainfall in these areas; the open forests and scrublands gives the Aravalli ecosystem a much-needed shield against exploitation. This is particularly important for the national capital region, where the urbanisation push poses a significant threat to the deemed forests. A scientific understanding of what constitutes a forest in a particular geography, with its unique climatological canvas is what Haryana needs. (HT PHOTO)
