Voter deletions in Bihar draft rolls: 4 lakhs in Patna district to 26,256 in Sheikhpura

An analysis of the poll-bound state’s draft electoral rolls indicates that the top 10 districts reporting maximum number of deletion of voters include Patna (3,95,500 voters), Madhubani (3,52,545), East Champaran (3,16,793), Gopalganj (3,10,363), Samastipur (2,83,955), Muzaffarpur (2,82,845), Saran (2,73,223), Gaya (2,45,663), Vaishali (2,25,953), and Darbhanga (2,03,315).

The 10 districts which have seen lowest voter deletions include Sheikhpura (26,256), Sheohar (28,166), Arwal (30,180), Lakhisarai (48,824) Jahanabad (53,089), Kaimur (73,940), Munger (74,916), Khagaria (79,551), Buxar (87,645), and Jamui (91,882).

“Those who have grievances can approach electoral officers for any claims and objections to be submitted between August 1 and September 1,” said an EC official.

The Muslim-dominated Seemanchal region in east Bihar has seen 2,73,920 voters deleted from Purnea district, 1,58,072 from Araria, 1,45,668 from Kishanganj, and 1,84,254 from Katihar.

The AIMIM’s Bihar spokesperson Adil Hasan Azad told The Indian Express: “We have been creating awareness among the Seemanchal voters about the SIR process. The booth level agents (BLAs) of the Opposition parties have been also active on ground. Voters of this region have applied for residential certificates in bigger number than other places as many people did not have other documents out of the 11 sought by the EC for the SIR (for those whose names were not on the 2003 voters’ list).”

The RJD-led Opposition Mahagathbandhan said they would closely track the SIR’s second phase of claims and objections to see if it has followed “due process of voter deletions”.

RJD leader and Buxar MP Sudhakar Singh said: “We have serious doubts on EC’s pruning of electoral rolls. We will soon get the numbers of claims and objections from voters, which could be overwhelming. Our BLAs are on the job.”

CPI (ML) Liberation office secretary Kumar Parvez told The Indian Express: “We are holding public hearings. We are also getting calls from some migrants who have not shifted permanently. By mid-August, we would get to know whether the EC has deleted a significant number of genuine voters as well.”

The Mahagathbandhan has slammed the EC for not sharing the list of the 65 lakh deleted voters. Several electors have complained about their names being excluded from the draft rolls despite submitting their enumeration forms. As the EC has increased the number of booths, many voters have been shifted to booths different from their exiting ones, leading to their scramble in search of their names in the rolls. A section of them are also meeting their booth level officers (BLOs) to check the physical list.

Kumar Parvez said, “EC did not agree to share with us the list of dead and permanently shifted. It is humongous task for BLAs to cross-check voters in each booth on basis of draft rolls. The EC has put the onus on us. Those left out from the rolls would have a harrowing time during the claims and objection period”.

RJD spokesperson Mrityunjay Tiwari echoed his views, saying “We are going to hold jan sunvai (public hearing) soon to compile voters’ grievances”.

Tejashwi row

RJD leader and Leader of the Opposition (LoP), Tejashwi Prasad Yadav, while addressing a press conference in Patna Saturday, claimed that he could not find his name in the rolls by using his voter card (EPIC) number. Subsequently, the Patna district administration issued a statement, pointing out that his name is listed as a voter “in polling station no. 204 in Bihar Animal Science University’s Library Building (in the Digha Assembly segment), at serial number 416”, which, it added, was previously listed “in polling station no. 171 in Bihar Animal Science University’s Library Building, at serial number 481”.

EC sources said, “Tejaswi Prasad Yadav used electoral roll with EPIC no. RAB0456228 for filing his nomination papers on affidavit in 2020. His name is there in the draft electoral rolls… His baseless argument that his name was removed has already been refuted.”

EC sources also said, “He (Tejashwi) was having this EPIC number even in the electoral roll in 2015… The other EPIC number RAB2916120 (cited by Tejashwi) has been found to be non-existing. More than ten years old records have been checked. No records have been found for the second EPIC number yet. It is highly likely that the second EPIC was never made through official channel. Further inquiries are on to understand the reality of the second EPIC number, whether that is a forged document.”