Bankipur ERO sends notice to Bihar Deputy CM Vijay Kumar Sinha over alleged dual EPIC IDs
Tired of too many ads?
Remove Ads
Tired of too many ads?
Remove Ads
Bankipur's Electoral Registration Officer (ERO) on Sunday issued a notice to Bihar Deputy Chief Minister Vijay Kumar Sinha over allegations that he holds two different EPIC (Electors Photo Identity Card) numbers. Sinha has been asked to submit his response by 5 pm on Sunday, 14 August.The move came hours after RJD leader Tejashwi Yadav claimed at a press conference that Sinha's name appears on two separate voter lists, one in Lakhisarai and another in Bankipur, with different ages and addresses.'We conducted research… You can call it a revelation or a fraud, that is up to you and the people of Bihar,' Yadav said, holding up two EPIC numbers he alleged belonged to the Deputy CM. According to him, the Bankipur record lists Sinha's age as 60, while the Lakhisarai list puts it at 57. He provided the EPIC numbers as IAF3939337 for Lakhisarai and AFS0853341 for Bankipur.Yadav alleged that Sinha signed documents for both constituencies during the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of the electoral roll, which resulted in his name appearing in two places. Calling it 'fraud in the voter card as well as in the age,' the RJD leader demanded that an FIR be filed against the Deputy CM.He also accused the Election Commission's SIR exercise in Bihar of being flawed if such duplication could occur.The controversy follows a separate dispute between Tejashwi Yadav and the Patna ERO, who earlier asked him to submit details of an EPIC card he mentioned during his 2 August press conference. Yadav said he only received the notice on 7 August and had replied the next day, but accused the media of conducting a 'trial' before he could formally respond.'Now my question is, will the Election Commission send a notice to the Patna and Lakhisarai district administrations regarding the Deputy CM? If action can be taken against us, why not against him?' Yadav asked, accusing the BJP of 'destroying democracy and the Constitution.'On Wednesday, the Patna ERO again reminded Yadav to submit the EPIC details, saying the requested documents had still not been provided. The row originally began when Yadav claimed his own name was missing from the draft voter list released on 1 August, and later alleged that his EPIC number had been changed.Inputs from agencies
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
New Indian Express
11 minutes ago
- New Indian Express
Maharashtra CM Fadnavis says no ban on eating non-veg, blames 1988 order for confusion
After an uproar from the Opposition, Maharashtra Chief Minister Devendra Fadnavis on Wednesday clarified that his government has not imposed any ban on eating non-vegetarian food on August 15. He stated that in 1988, the erstwhile state government had allegedly issued an order to shut down slaughterhouses, which some municipal corporations have continued to follow. Mr Fadnavis said he was also unaware of reports about a ban on eating non-vegetarian food and the closure of mutton and chicken shops. He added that he then inquired with the municipal corporation which had allegedly issued the order imposing the ban on the sale of mutton and chicken. 'It was revealed that the respective municipal corporation had not given any such order by our government, but followed the 1988 order issued by the erstwhile state government. I was also told that during the Uddhav Thackeray government also, some of the municipal corporations issued similar orders, then why is there hue and cry now,' Mr Fadnavis asked. He said there is freedom to eat and live in the country, and that right has been given by the Constitution, but some people are unnecessarily targeting their government.
Hindustan Times
11 minutes ago
- Hindustan Times
Citizen-State relations and the burden of document raj
For over a month now, the Election Commission of India (ECI) has ensnared the bulk of Bihar's voting population in a maze of paperwork, thanks to its Special Intensive Review (SIR) of the voter rolls. In the process, widely accepted documents — Aadhaar, ration card and the voter card itself — have been declared suspect, despite the Supreme Court's intervention. Through executive fiat, ECI has created a new, arbitrary document hierarchy, declaring 11 specific documents — some of which even the most privileged Indians struggle to procure — as appropriate for determining citizenship. Now, as the process moves to the question of deletions from the voter rolls and the very real threat of disenfranchisement, ECI is obdurately hiding behind its paperwork, refusing public access to the list of deleted names. This tyranny of paper is also at the centre of another controversy. The enduring image of Rahul Gandhi's recent press conference is the seven-foot-high stack of paper — the physical electoral rolls — that the Congress team trawled through to identify discrepancies. The Indian bureaucracy's obsession with paper (files, orders, documents) is well known. Anthropologist Mathew Hull traces this to the colonial bureaucracy's distrust of local Indian functionaries, which manifested itself in kaghaz raj or 'documentary rule'. (HT Photo) In different ways, both episodes reveal one of the most pernicious aspects of the exercise of State power in India — the use of documents to mediate citizen-State relations and their role in feeding the State's obsession with ordering citizens into administrative categories of 'eligible' and 'ineligible'. Bureaucratic norms cohere around the idea that 'good governance' is about weeding out the 'ineligible'. At one level, this is a legitimate governance impulse. After all, who will disagree with the need to ensure that all citizens access their rights, particularly voting rights, and that no 'ineligible' person misuses the system? However, the practices this unleashes often lead to the kind of documentation chaos as we are witnessing in Bihar. Worse, it opens the window for co-opting bureaucratic practices into legitimising exclusionary political projects. In hiding behind its mounds of paper, obdurately refusing to make its processes and documents transparent to the public, ECI has demonstrated how effectively the State can weaponise paper even in pursuit of ostensibly legitimate goals. Proving eligibility via documents is a unique burden that the Indian State places on its citizens. After Partition, governments in India and Pakistan adopted the practice of adjudicating citizenship claims by evaluating documents such as passports and, later, ration/voter cards that claimants possessed to determine their authenticity as citizens. This, as political scientist Niraja Jayal has argued, inverted the standard relationship between citizenship and documents. In most contexts, the possession of citizenship is the means to acquire identity documents such as passports. In the Indian case, documents became the means for determining citizenship. This penchant for relying on documents to mediate citizenship soon extended to routine administrative tasks. The Indian bureaucracy's obsession with paper (files, orders, documents) is well known. Anthropologist Mathew Hull traces this to the colonial bureaucracy's distrust of local Indian functionaries, which manifested itself in kaghaz raj or 'documentary rule'. Only through a connection with paper, Hull argues, could an action be construed as an action. Contemporary Indian bureaucracy adopted this practice and extended this culture of distrust to how it deals both with itself and with the public at large. In dealing with the public, documents — ration cards, BPL cards, job cards, Aadhaar cards, voter cards — came to play the role of gatekeepers. For citizens, they are the primary means to make themselves visible to the State and place claims. For the State, they are the means through which it seeks to 'see' society, categorising the population into administratively legible segments that become the basis for administrative action. The culture of distrust that underpins this allowed for an intriguing twist. The State took it upon itself to categorise the population as 'eligible' and 'ineligible'; after all, corruption enables the 'ineligible' beneficiary to access the State. But to achieve this goal, the bureaucracy appropriated the power to verify its own documents, casting suspicion both on its documents and, rather conveniently, on those in possession of these documents. This administrative suspicion can easily be weaponised and placed in service of political projects, as we are now witnessing in Bihar. Words like 'verification', 'authentication', 'deletion' and 'doubtful' are routinely deployed in administrative parlance. The citizen is a suspicious actor, in constant need of verification. It is this bureaucratic impulse that has allowed the ECI, with absolutely no irony, to claim the voter card, distributed by its own machinery, to be inaccurate, leaving it to the Supreme Court judges to remind the ECI of the principle of 'presumption of correctness'. Crucially, it is precisely this suspicion that can become a convenient weapon in the politics of exclusion. Political narratives of 'infiltrators' and outsiders find legitimacy precisely because the State regularly reminds us of how suspiciously it views its documents, allowing itself the luxury of authenticating documents at will. It should be no surprise that the spectre of NRC is writ large over the SIR as well. As the SIR and electoral roll controversy unfolds, the risk of mass disenfranchisement (6.5 million deletions in the draft list), procedural arbitrariness, the constitutional overreach of ECI, and its sheer incompetence are at the centre of the ongoing political and legal challenge. The debate, however, is missing a deeper interrogation into the tyranny of paper and the culture of distrust it has entrenched that makes even our institutions capable of undermining democracy and citizens' rights. The struggle to protect democratic freedoms must extend to interrogating and indeed challenging the culture of kaghaz raj within the State that makes critical independent public institutions vulnerable. Yamini Aiyar is senior visiting fellow, Brown University. The views expressed are personal.
The Hindu
11 minutes ago
- The Hindu
Suresh Gopi maintains silence on voter list discrepancies as protests by BJP, CPI(M) rock Thrissur
Political tempers flared in Thrissur on Wednesday as the controversy over alleged voter list manipulation ahead of the 2024 Lok Sabha elections spilled onto the streets, triggering protests by Bharatiya Janata Party and Communist Party of India (Marxist) workers. Amid the tension, Union Minister and Thrissur MP Suresh Gopi arrived in the city at 9.30 a.m., his first visit since the allegations surfaced. While greeted with a grand reception by BJP workers at the railway station under tight security, he avoided interaction with the media, responding only with a sarcastic statement: 'Thanks for all your help.' Throughout the day, he refused to address media questions on alleged electoral irregularities involving him and his family. He did not respond to questions about the attacks on clergy in Chhattisgarh and Odisha too. Mr. Gopi visited Aswini Hospital to meet five BJP workers injured in clashes with CPI(M) activists on Tuesday night and later inspected his camp office, where CPI(M) demonstrators had poured black oil on the signboard. He skipped the BJP protest march, travelling via Angamaly to visit family of nun Preethi Mary, who was attacked in Chhattisgarh, before proceeding to Kothamangalam to meet the family of a student who recently died by suicide. Unrest began on Tuesday evening when CPI(M) workers marched to Mr. Gopi's office over the voter list row, blackening its nameboard. The police arrested one activist involved. Tension escalated as BJP workers launched a counter-march to the CPI(M) office. An altercation followed, leaving five BJP activists with minor injuries. On Wednesday morning, the BJP district committee, led by former State president K. Surendran and State general secretary Shobha Surendran, marched to the City Police Commissioner's office demanding action against those responsible for the attack on the MP's office and party workers. The police blocked the march with barricades, prompting workers to climb over them waving party flags. Water cannons were deployed three times to disperse the crowd, but the protesters stood their ground. Addressing a public meeting later, Mr. Surendran warned the CPI(M) and the Congress against 'trampling upon the mandate' of the people of Thrissur. Ms. Shobha Surendran denounced the vandalism at the MP's office as an insult to democracy and the city's voters. The CPI(M) too took out a protest march against attack on its office by the BJP workers. The All India Youth Federation, which staged a night march on Tuesday, accused the Election Commission of being reduced to a political instrument of the Sangh Parivar and demanded a stronger wave of public protests against voter list manipulation. Addressing the march, CPI State Council member K.K. Valsaraj accused the Centre of using its influence to dismantle the democratic election process, alleging collusion between the BJP and the Election Commission in large-scale voter list tampering. He criticised the continued silence of Mr. Gopi, calling it suspicious, and accused the Election Commission of trivialising serious allegations with 'nonsensical' explanations.
