Election process in India and allegation of Votechori

 

There have been so many complaints and trends about EVM machines and VVPAT, but election commission could not take it positive sense about the allegations by the political parties other than BJP.  Inintially, from the year 2014, they alleged that EVM was hacked to manipulate the votings or Votechori.  The Election Commission, could not gain confidence amongs the opposition parties that it could indicate the election process is true and fair and there is no doubt.  Even no CBI enquries or Investigations were conducted for the allegations or no press or public conferences  at public platform, to win the public confidence.  ADR challenged and alleged in the Supreme Court about so many issues on voting and counting of votes from EVM.  ADR expected the Supreme Court could interfere and issue logical guidelines about counting of EVM with reference to the VVPAT slips so that turn back to the ballot papers could be avoided.  Public were much happy about the Supreme Court, advising the Election Commission to install VVPAT machines along with all EVM, so that doubt will re-counting could be possible to tally VVPAT slips tallying with EVM counts, but Election Commissioner paid no heed and continue the process.

Electronic voting machines (EVM) have become more pressing for the Congress and doubts were raised,  after it manipulation in consecutive electoral process in the Haryana and Maharashtra Assembly elections. Haryana High Court, even ordered the ECI to hand over video recording of voting in the evening after election hours. 

in December 2024, the Punjab and Haryana High Court ordered the Election Commission of India (ECI) to hand over videography and CCTV footage related to specific polling stations in the recent Haryana assembly elections. The order was issued in response to a petition filed by advocate Mehmood Pracha and a Congress candidate, Vijay Pratap Singh, who sought access to these materials to ensure transparency and potentially challenge the results. 

The danger of electronic manipulation with EVMs is not one of the many election integrity-related concerns that the Election Commission of India (ECI) needs to address.  According to many political parties officials, there is  proof that manipulation, either remotely or by preprogramming, is a possibility. Trinamool Congress leader Abhishek Banerjee, NC leader and J&K Chief Minister Omar Abdullah, and at least two opposition figures.  

In Jan.,2025, Rahul Gandhi accused that there is scam at large scale and display at public platform in Karnatka and presented so many examples, which has led to the voting scam.

In August, 2025, Rahul Gandhi accused the Ruling Government and their private agencies of manipulating electoral databases in Karnataka ahead of elections, alleging that thousands of genuine voters were deleted or replaced or fake id created. The ECI has since maintained that the revision process was conducted in accordance with law and that any grievances could be addressed through the Commission’s redressal mechanism.

In order to guarantee increased accountability and transparency in the creation, updating, and dissemination of electoral rolls, the petitioner asked the Court to order the ECI to create legally obligatory rules. Additionally, he requested that any additional roll revisions or finalizations be temporarily halted until the completion of an independent audit. According to the appeal, which cited purported documents and screenshots from Gandhi's press conference, some entries were connected to commercial or nonexistent locations, while others showed up in several polling places. According to the petition, "independent citizen verification apparently confirmed duplicate and fake entries." 

In Oct., 2025, the Supreme Court, straightway refused to entertain a public interest litigation (‘PIL’) seeking setting up of a Special Investigation Team (‘SIT’), headed by a retired judge, to probe into Leader of Opposition Rahul Gandhi’s allegations of large-scale voter roll manipulation in Karnataka before 2024 Lok Sabha elections to engineer the outcome of the electoral process.

Refusing to entertain the  PIL, a  Bench of Justices Surya Kant and Joymalya Bagchi observed that the petitioner was free to approach the Election Commission of India (‘ECI’) instead. “We have heard the petitioner’s counsel. We are not inclined to entertain this petition, which is purportedly filed in the public interest. The petitioner may pursue the matter before the ECI, if so advised,” the Bench said.

The petition was filed by advocate and Congress member Rohit Pandey, who relied on statements made by Rahul Gandhi at a press conference on August 7, where the Congress leader alleged widespread tampering of voter lists in Mahadevapura and accused the Election Commission of India (‘ECI’) of colluding with the ruling Bharatiya Janata Party (‘BJP’) to facilitate large-scale voter fraud during the 2024 Lok Sabha

According to the petition, Gandhi’s remarks pointed to a “systematic dilution of genuine voters” through duplication, fake entries, and the inclusion of names linked to non-existent or commercial addresses. The plea alleged that such manipulations, if true, strike at the core of “one person, one vote” principle enshrined under Articles 325 and 326 of the Constitution.

Rahul Gandhi said Operation Sarkar Chori was launched in Haryana to deny the party from coming to power. The Congress leader said all, despite Exit polls and opinion polls stating that his party was headed towards a landslide win in Haryana, the party lost the elections through a centralised operation, which allegedly created 25 lakh fake voters. 

Earlier on September 2025, Mr. Gandhi warned the BJP of an impending expose, stating that he would soon unleash a “hydrogen bomb” about his allegations of vote theft, as what was shown about Mahadevpura was just an “atom bomb.”  In another presser, Mr. Gandhi mounted a scathing attack on Chief Election Commissioner (CEC) Gyanesh Kumar, accusing the CEC of “protecting” those who are “destroying” Indian democracy by refusing to share technical details of persons behind an attempt to delete names of voters from the electoral rolls of the Mahadevpura Assembly seat in Karnataka.

 It was expected from Supreme Court on PIL filed by the Litigants, for investigation of Voter's Data and alleged scam, but Supreme Court rejected the PIL and advised them to approach the Election Commission of India, who is the sole owner of the database and can correct, if necessary.

Bihar Election and SIR: 

The Election Commission of India (ECI) uses SIR, a thorough door-to-door verification and update of electoral rolls, to guarantee precise and error-free voter lists.   Booth Level Officers (BLOs) do extensive house-to-house verification.    Voters who are eligible are added, while names that are duplicates, deceased, or ineligible are removed. submission of documentation to confirm citizenship and residency.

 

Election Commission could not identify and analyzed the issue that caused duplication or fake voters and fixed the responsibility recorded in the system, as while enrollment of voters that could be an authorized person that system must have stored and that authorized person could be held responsibility for the crimies for misuse of powers, but in vain.

 

 After a month-long revision of the voter list, India's Election Commission released revised draft electoral rolls for Bihar state, where important elections are set for November.

However, opposition parties and election charities claim the process was hurried, and some Bihar voters have told the BBC that the draft rolls contain dead persons and incorrect pictures. The commission stated that its representatives visited everyone of the state's 78.9 million registered voters to confirm their information during the Special Intensive Revision, or SIR, which took place from June 25 to July 26. It stated that an update was required because the last such upgrade was made in 2003.

 

During hearing at Supreme Court, Election Commission replied that 65 lacs voters were deleted and list of such deleted voters can not be revealed or shared with Opposition parties. Opposition parties have accused the commission of excluding a large number of voters, particularly Muslims who comprise a sizable portion of the population in four border districts.  Due to opposition MPs' demands for a discussion on what they see as a threat to democracy, Parliament has been repeatedly adjourned. They screamed "Stop stealing votes," "Take SIR back," and "Down down Modi" outside. After watchdog ADR questioned the action's timing, the Supreme Court is also considering it.  There hasn't been enough time given to the exercise, and it comes barely three months before the assembly elections," ADR's Jagdeep Chhokar told the BBC. "As reports from the ground demonstrated, there were inconsistencies when the exercise was being done and the procedure of data collection was substantially incorrect," he continued.  In court, the ADR has claimed that the process "would disenfranchise millions of real voters" in one of the poorest states in India. 

 

It says the SIR shifts the burden onto people to prove their citizenship, often requiring their own and their parents' documents within a short deadline - an impossible task for millions of poor migrant workers.

While the draft roll was being published, we travelled to Patna and nearby villages to hear what voters think of SIR.

In Danara village, home to the poorest of the poor known as Mahadalits, most residents work on farms of upper-castes or are unemployed.

Homes are crumbling, open drains line the narrow lanes and a stagnant puddle near the local temple has turned brackish.

Most residents had little to no idea about SIR or its impact, and many weren't sure if officials had even visited their homes.

But they deeply value their vote. "Losing it would be devastating," says Rekha Devi. "It will push us further into poverty."

In Kharika village, many men said they'd heard of SIR and submitted forms, spending 300 rupees (£3.42; £2.55) on getting new photos taken. But after the draft rolls came out, farmer and retired teacher Tarkeshwar Singh called it "a mess". He shared pages showing his family's details - pointing out errors, including the wrong photo next to his name.

"I have no idea whose photo it is," he says, adding that his wife Suryakala Devi and son Rajeev also have wrong pictures. "But the worst is my other son Ajeev's case - it has an unknown woman's photo."

Mr Singh goes on to list other anomalies - in his daughter-in-law Juhi Kumari's document, he's named as husband in place of his son. Another daughter-in-law, Sangeeta Singh, is listed twice from the same address - only one has her correct photo and date of birth.

Many of his relatives and neighbours, he says, have similar complaints. He points out the name of a cousin who died more than five years back but still figures on the list - and at least two names that appear twice.

"There's obviously been no checking. The list has dead people and duplicates and many who did not even fill the form. This is a misuse of government machinery and billions of rupees that have been spent on this exercise."

 

As the matter was fixed who is going to win, nobody was paying any attention to the problem arising out of SIR.

 

 

 

 

Palestine and israel conflict

 the Palestine and Israel conflict

One of the world's bloodiest and longest-running conflicts is that between Israel and the Palestinian people. It has almost a century of history.

Israel and the Arab countries have fought several wars. There have also been uprisings against Israeli occupation, known as intifadas, as well as Israeli retaliation and crackdowns.

The most recent conflict between Israel and Hamas in Gaza is just one example of the ongoing effects of the past conflict over issues like land, boundaries, and rights.

What was Israel before 1948 ?

After the Ottoman Empire, which had dominated that region of the Middle East, was defeated in World War One, Britain seized control of what is now known as Palestine.Along with other ethnic groups, the predominant population was Arab, while the minority was Jewish.

When the UK consented in principle to the creation of a "national home" in Palestine for Jews—a commitment known as the Balfour Declaration—tensions between the Jewish and Arab communities grew.

Although Palestinian Arabs had a centuries-old claim to the property and were against the relocation, Jews had historical ties to it. According to the British, the rights of the existing Palestinian Arab residents must be upheld.

The second phase of the war began on 14 May 1948, with the declaration of the establishment of the State of Israel and the termination of the British Mandate at midnight. The following morning, the surrounding Arab armies invaded Palestine, beginning the 1948 Arab–Israeli War.

Israel gained some territory formerly granted to Palestinian Arabs under the United Nations resolution in 1947. Egypt and Jordan retained control over the Gaza Strip and the West Bank respectively. 

Israeli forces' direct expulsions, the destruction of Arab villages, psychological warfare, including terrorism, massacres like the well-known Deir Yassin massacre, which sent many people running in terror, crop burning, and typhoid outbreaks in some areas are some of the factors that contributed to the exodus.

"Israel" is over a millennium older than "Palestine." After that, the region was inhabited mostly by Arabs for over a thousand years. Thus, both Arabs and Jews have a rightful claim to the land.

The leaders of the Jewish Agency for Palestine accepted parts of the plan, while Arab leaders refused it. This triggered the 1947–1949 Palestine war and led, in 1948, to the establishment of the state of Israel on a part of Mandate Palestine as the Mandate came to an end.

After the war, only two parts of Palestine remained in Arab control: the West Bank and East Jerusalem were annexed by Jordan, and the Gaza Strip was occupied by Egypt, which were conquered by Israel during the Six-Day War in 1967.

Israel was not a state before 1948. It was a planned country that the British and UN agreed would be created but weren't sure how to do it most equitably.

Zionist military forces destroyed almost 530 Palestinian villages and targeted major towns between 1947 and 1949. Numerous massacres and other mass atrocities claimed the lives of about 15,000 Palestinians. 

One of the most notorious murders of the war was carried out by Zionist forces on April 9, 1948, in the village of Deir Yassin, which is located on the western suburbs of Jerusalem. Members of the Stern Gang Zionist militia and the pre-Israeli state Irgun killed over 110 men, women, and children.

After considering various options, the UN recommended ending the Mandate and dividing Palestine into two sovereign states—one Jewish and one Palestinian Arab—with Jerusalem becoming an international city (Resolution 181 (II) of 1947). During the 1948 war with neighboring Arab states, one of the two planned states, Israel, declared its independence and grew to occupy 77% of the mandate Palestine land, including the majority of Jerusalem. More over half of the Arab Palestinians were forced to leave or flee. The remaining land given to the Arab State by resolution 181 was ruled by Jordan and Egypt. Israel captured these areas (the West Bank and Gaza Strip) during the 1967 war, including East Jerusalem, which Israel later annexed.

An estimated half a million Palestinians left their homeland in a second migration brought on by the war. The foundations of a fair and sustainable peace were outlined in Security Council Resolution 242 (1967), which called for the cessation of all claims or states of belligerency, the just settlement of the refugee issue, and Israel's withdrawal from conflict-occupied territory. Resolution 338 of the Security Council, which was passed after the 1973 hostilities, among other things, called for peace talks between the parties. The fundamental rights of the Palestinian people to self-determination, national independence, sovereignty, and return were reaffirmed by the General Assembly in 1974. 

https://www.un.org/unispal/history2/origins-and-evolution-of-the-palestine-problem/part-ii-1947-1977/

Manipur State

 

Manipur State