Mahua Moitra seeks FIR against CEC over SIR process, alleges electoral irregularities

New Delhi: Trinamool Congress MP Mahua Moitra on Thursday said she has lodged a complaint at Delhi’s Parliament Street Police Station against Chief Election Commissioner (CEC) Gyanesh Kumar, seeking registration of an FIR and a probe into alleged irregularities linked to the Election Commission’s Special Intensive Revision (SIR) exercise.

In a letter addressed to the Station House Officer (SHO), Moitra urged the police to register a case, investigate the alleged offences, identify the role of all individuals involved, examine relevant witnesses, including the two Election Commissioners, and secure evidence to prevent its alleged destruction or tampering.

“I request that a First Information Report be registered and the offences investigated, that the role of each person involved be ascertained, that the relevant witnesses, including the two Election Commissioners, be examined, and that the evidence be secured without delay so as to prevent its destruction or manipulation,” she wrote.

The Krishnanagar MP also sought a free copy of the FIR upon its registration.

Citing media reports, Moitra alleged that the two Election Commissioners had repeatedly objected to decisions and orders allegedly being taken without their knowledge and contrary to their advice.

She further claimed that the functioning of the Election Commission had deviated from constitutional and legal norms governing the institution.

According to Moitra’s complaint, concerns were raised over the alleged reallocation of responsibilities within the Commission, including the removal of oversight of electoral rolls from the two Election Commissioners.

“The Chief Election Commissioner has no power to act for the Commission against the recorded opinion of both his colleagues, and none whatsoever to issue communications in its name which it has never approved. A document made so as to cause it to be believed that it was made by the authority of the Commission, when it was not, is a false document within the meaning of Section 335 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita; its making is forgery under Section 336; and its use as genuine is punishable under Section 340(2).”

“The electoral roll is a public register, and every entry deliberately marking a living and resident elector as absent, shifted or dead, without the verification the law demands, is a forgery of that register. Each such entry is, at the same time, a breach of official duty in connection with the preparation and revision of electoral rolls, which Section 32 of the Representation of the People Act, 1950 makes a distinct offence.”

She also alleged that Form 6 under the Registration of Electors Rules, 1960, had been altered to require voters to establish their parentage through earlier electoral rolls without corresponding amendments to the rules.

The Trinamool leader further claimed that state-level election officials were denied complete access to electoral rolls and that appeals were filed against orders of judicial officers directing the inclusion of certain electors, allegedly without proper authority.

The most serious allegation, Moitra said, pertained to communications purportedly being issued in the name of the Election Commission of India without the approval of the full Commission.

Escalating her attack on the poll panel chief, Moitra alleged that Gyanash Kumar had acted without the consent of the other two Election Commissioners and argued that any actions resulting in the alleged disenfranchisement of genuine voters could not be considered part of his official duties.

IANS