Karnataka HC Stays FIRs Against BJP Booth Agents Over Bulk Voter Deletion Forms

New Delhi: The Karnataka High Court has stayed proceedings in two FIRs registered against BJP booth-level agents accused of filing bulk Form 7 applications seeking the deletion of voters’ names from electoral rolls during the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) exercise in Bengaluru’s Malleshwaram Assembly constituency.

Justice Anant Ramanath Hegde granted interim relief to G S Vasanthalakshmi and Deepak Singh R after hearing their separate petitions challenging the FIRs. The court questioned the basis for initiating criminal proceedings before the competent electoral authorities had examined and decided on the applications seeking voter deletions.

Senior Advocate M Aruna Shyam, appearing for the petitioners, argued that the complaints were premature as the competent electoral authority had not yet adjudicated the Form 7 applications. He submitted that the prescribed electoral process required the concerned authorities to examine objections and determine whether voters’ names should be added to or deleted from the electoral rolls.

Aruna Shyam also argued that the complaints could not be used to bypass the statutory mechanism governing electoral roll revision. According to the petitioners, any alleged irregularities in the applications should be dealt with under the relevant provisions of election law, including Section 31 of the Representation of the People Act, 1950.

The High Court questioned why criminal proceedings had been initiated before the electoral authorities determined the validity of the applications. Observing that the FIRs appeared premature, the court stayed the proceedings until the next date of hearing. The matter is scheduled to be heard again on October 27.

What Are The Allegations Against The BJP Agents?

The two FIRs stem from complaints alleging that the BJP booth-level agents submitted Form 7 objections seeking the removal of voters who continued to reside in the constituency.

According to the complaints, Vasanthalakshmi filed objections concerning 778 voters across eight polling booths, while Deepak Singh submitted objections relating to 136 voters at Booth 68 in Malleshwaram.

The complaints alleged that some voters were wrongly described as “absent” or “permanently shifted” to justify seeking the deletion of their names. The FIRs also alleged discrepancies in signatures on several forms, raising suspicions of forgery and the furnishing of false information.

The FIRs were registered by Bengaluru’s Vyalikaval and Yeshwanthpura police stations following complaints by a Congress leader who contested the 2023 Karnataka Assembly election from Malleshwaram.

The allegations against the BJP agents remain subject to legal proceedings, and the High Court’s interim order does not amount to a final determination of the merits of the case.

State Opposes Petitions, Seeks Investigation

Opposing the petitions, Additional State Public Prosecutor Anoop Kumar argued that the allegations of impersonation and forgery warranted an investigation. He also contended that the agents had submitted applications in excess of the permissible limit under the relevant rules and regulations.

The complainant’s counsel, Shatabish Shivanna, argued that the manner in which the Form 7 applications were submitted required investigation. He alleged that the applications were part of a conspiracy to target voters belonging to particular communities, including Other Backward Classes (OBCs) and Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (SC/STs).

The petitioners, however, maintained that the election authorities were responsible for examining the objections and determining whether the names in question qualified for deletion.

What The Court Said

During the hearing, Justice Hegde questioned the basis for lodging criminal complaints before the competent electoral authority had decided on the Form 7 applications.

The court observed that electoral authorities were empowered to examine objections, accept or reject applications, and determine whether names should be added to or removed from the electoral rolls.

It also questioned whether the filing of bulk applications, by itself, established criminality, noting that the electoral process provided for scrutiny of the objections by the designated officials.

The court further observed that there could not be a prima facie basis for investigation before the competent authority had taken a decision on the applications.

The High Court accordingly stayed the proceedings against the two BJP booth-level agents until the next hearing, while allowing the respondents to seek modification or vacation of the interim order.

The case comes amid scrutiny of Form 7 applications submitted during the SIR exercise. Form 7 is used to raise objections to the inclusion of a name in the electoral roll or to seek deletion of a name on prescribed grounds. The dispute before the High Court concerns the allegations surrounding the bulk applications and the timing and legal basis of the criminal proceedings initiated against the petitioners.

ALSO READ: IIIT Ranchi Student Dies By Suicide in Hostel; Probe Underway