By Kuldip Nayar
NEW DELHI, The Intelligence Bureau has warned the Union government that with the general election approaching, “the law ‘and order environment may get further vitiated”, Various political parties and groups, according to the 1B, are likely to “accelerate” efforts to garner public sympathy and support by launching militant agitations over real and perceived grievances of different sections of society.
“The enforcement authorities will need to remain alert and prepared to meet new challenges which come their way,” says the IB, Top secret assessment by the IB is said to have confirmed the general impression that the elections will be “violent”, marked by in density of force and booth capturing.
The Election Commission is itself exercised over the problem of booth capturing by antisocial elements with the connivance of lower level functionaries.
Initially, booth capturing was confined to certain pockets in States like Bihar. But over the years this malady has spread to other States. The Election Commission had, as long ago as 1980 issued instructions to prevent such malpractices, but to little avail.
There are two kinds of booth capturing violent and silent according to the Election Commission. Violent booth capturing occurs when presiding and polling officers are threatened by armed men at gunpoint and votes are cast in favor of a particular candidate. Antisocial elements arm themselves with lethal weapons, invade polling booths in the early hours of polling and make the polling party surrender all ballot papers. They then fill the ballot boxes with the ballot papers marked in favor of the candidate of their choice. The presiding and polling officers and even the polling agents of the candidates remain silent spectators for fear of risk to their lives.
The weaker sections among the electorate, like the Harijans, are threatened in certain areas with dire consequences if they venture to step out of their houses on pol ling day to exercise their franchise. In several cases their votes are Cast by impersonators belonging to 4 particular group.
In “silent” booth capturing there is connivance of the polling personnel and it is with their cooperation that votes are cast in favor of a particular candidate. In such cases, the presiding officers and polling personnel do not follow the prescribed rules.
For example, certain ballot papers are not signed by the presiding officer, voters who had been impersonated are not given the tendered votes or the presiding officers’ diaries do not report the goings-on during the polling.
Another example of silent booth capturing is where polling Officials receive hospitality from candidates or their agents in various forms by way of food, drinks, etc. Thereafter, the personnel become pliable and serve the interests of candidates who feted them.
Article extracted from this publication >> November 24, 1989
