During an interaction with media persons last December, a powerful Election Commission functionary snapped at a reporter from a prominent English newspaper: “Tu kya likhati rehti hai (what the heck do you keep writing?)” He was upset with the reporter for quoting a former chief election commissioner who wasn’t very charitable about the functioning of the poll watchdog. Other reporters intervened to mollify him.
ECI beat reporters were not surprised, though. They had seen it coming way back in February that year—days before then-CEC Rajiv Kumar retired. While talking to reporters in the presence of this EC functionary, Kumar showed his appreciation for them, saying if the media wrote 10 reports about the election commission, six were positive. The functionary interjected: “I would want all 10 reports to be positive.” I wouldn’t name that functionary because these exchanges happened during informal interactions.
I was reminded of these exchanges involving that unnamed EC functionary when I heard about the altercation between CEC Gyanesh Kumar and Cooch Behar South Observer Anurag Yadav, an Uttar Pradesh cadre IAS officer, last week. Yadav didn’t remember the exact number of polling booths in his jurisdiction, triggering Kumar’s wrath. Yadav told him that he too had given 25 years of his life in public service and the CEC couldn’t treat a senior officer like that. The Cooch Behar South observer got marching orders within hours.
Anurag Yadav shouldn’t mind it. He is not the only one. CEC Gyanesh Kumar knows his powers—and the life-long immunity or protection from any legal proceedings over any action he undertakes as part of his duty under a 2023 law. He is exercising those powers at will. He has transferred scores of IAS and IPS officers, including Director Generals of Police and Chief Secretaries, in poll-bound states, virtually putting a question mark on their professional integrity and neutrality. The CEC wouldn’t tell us how he concluded that a certain IAS or IPS officer would come in the way of free and fair elections and how he chose their replacements.
Recall how the bench of Chief Justice of India Surya Kant pulled up the West Bengal CS, DGP and Malda DM and SP for the gherao of judicial officers in Sujapur. As it was, all these four officers were appointed by the Election Commission. That suggests the level of arbitrariness in the transfers and postings of IAS and IPS officers by the ECI. The biggest lapse on the part of the ECI, however, was the disenfranchisement of 27 lakh voters in West Bengal—for the purpose of this assembly election, at least. Under the Supreme Court’s direction, it was the ECI that had to set up the appellate tribunals. The ECI failed to comply with the court order as the tribunals couldn’t be put in place until the publication of the final voter list post-adjudication. The fault lay at CEC Gyanesh Kumar’s door. It was surprising that the CJI-led bench allowed the denial of voting rights to 27 lakh people in the special intensive revision (SIR) of electoral rolls and didn’t say even a word about the ECI’s gross failure. As these 27 lakh people couldn’t appeal to those tribunals, they were deemed to be non-voters for the purpose of this election at least. Guilty until proven innocent, isn’t it?
Also read: CEC Gyanesh Kumar is a constitutional failure. Damage is not procedural, it is existential
Deleting voters, reprimanding opposition
There have been celebrations in the BJP camp over the exclusion of 27 lakh voters. It’s because a high number of deletions were from Muslim-dominated districts like Murshidabad, Malda and North Dinajpur, among others. BJP leaders believe that the deletions would hurt the Trinamool Congress. They may turn out to be crucial in close contests. In the 2021 Assembly election, for instance, the victory margin was less than 8,000 votes in 57 constituencies. The TMC won 29 of them and the BJP 28.
Such large-scale deletions can be disruptive, depending on which party lost more of its loyal voters. For instance, 4.55 lakh deletions in Murshidabad translate to an average of 20,668 votes per constituency across its 22 assembly seats. That’s a potential game-changer in closely contested polls.
It has given enough ammunition to the Opposition to attack CEC Gyanesh Kumar and question his neutrality and integrity. The latter’s conduct has only lent credence to their suspicion. Recall how he treated TMC MPs last week. When these MPs alleged that the CEC had asked them to ‘get out’, the ECI virtually trolled them from its official ‘X’ handle: Election Commission’s Ultimatum to Trinamool Congress. Elections in West Bengal this time: Fear-free, violence-free….”
It has given the Opposition enough ammunition to attack CEC Gyanesh Kumar and question his neutrality and integrity. His conduct has only lent credence to their suspicions. Recall how he treated TMC MPs last week. When they alleged that the CEC had asked them to ‘get out’, the ECI virtually trolled them from its official X handle: “ECI’s Straight-talk to Trinamool Congress. This time, the Elections in West Bengal would surely be: fear-free, violence-free…”
चुनाव आयोग की तृणमूल कांग्रेस को दो टूक
पश्चिम बंगाल में इस बार चुनाव:
भय रहित,
हिंसा रहित,
धमकी रहित,
प्रलोभन रहित,
छापा रहित,
बूथ एवं सोर्स जामिंग रहित होकर ही रहेंगे
ECI's Straight-talk to Trinamool Congress
This time, the Elections in West Bengal would surely be :… pic.twitter.com/p5fM8Uu337
— Election Commission of India (@ECISVEEP) April 8, 2026
And it wasn’t the first time the ECI had sought to put opposition leaders in their place. That said, let’s separate the individual from the institution. The latter represents the collective of thousands and lakhs of people involved in the election process, who ensure that India remains a vibrant democracy envied by the world. An individual’s actions—real, perceived, or imagined—cannot be the yardstick to judge them all. Our democracy is too large and too robust for any one person to undermine it. Even Indira Gandhi tried and failed.
As for Gyanesh Kumar, I may have serious issues with his conduct, especially vis-à-vis opposition parties, but I still refuse to attribute any sinister political motive. Let me play devil’s advocate and instead blame the 27 lakh deletions on the sheer incompetence of ECI decision-makers. Unless someone has detailed data on each of these 27 lakh deletions, including religion and political affiliation, any claim about which party stands to gain or lose from the SIR exercise rests on presumptions and suppositions. I am not suggesting that such data cannot be accessed or analysed by those with the resources. All I am driving at is this: we must keep our confirmation bias in check until we have more concrete evidence.
Also read: People in power no longer care to be seen as neutral. CEC Gyanesh Kumar isn’t the only one
Does it mean advantage BJP in Bengal?
That said, these 27 lakh deletions don’t necessarily pave the way for the installation of a non-vegetarian chief minister from the BJP. It’s premature to count the chickens. There are at least four factors that can tip the scales and they are based on the inputs from the Sangh Parivar. To start with, while Muslim-dominated districts have witnessed maximum deletions, numbers are also high in Matua-dominated districts like Nadia and North-24 Parganas.
It was the support of Matuas that propelled the BJP into the principal Opposition’s space in West Bengal. Their support is vital for the party in this election. While the Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA) has failed to enthuse the community, significant deletions from the voter list could potentially alienate a section of them. For the TMC, one Muslim voter disenfranchised in this election would be a loss of one vote, because his or her family was going to vote for it anyway. But disenfranchisement of one Matua voter may mean the loss of at least two to three votes for the BJP—parents, spouse and adult children, if any.
Second, massive deletions have shifted the electoral discourse—from what the Mamata Banerjee government did or did not do over the past 15 years to what the (BJP-driven) SIR has done to 27 lakh Bengalis by depriving them of their voting rights and identity. As with any government after three consecutive terms, reports from the ground suggested strong anti-incumbency, with questions being raised about jobs, industry, and women’s safety. These deletions are now resonating strongly on the ground.
Third, it can potentially consolidate 27 per cent Muslim population—estimated to have grown since 2011 census—in favour of the Trinamool Congress.
Fourth, many Sangh Parivar members are apprehensive about a possible backlash from common people, given the sheer scale of deletions. Also, many Left and Congress cadres who used to vote for the BJP to defeat Mamata Banerjee may see a bigger challenge in SIR and decide to go with their respective parties.
In a nutshell, while CEC Gyanesh Kumar is under attack from the Opposition for SIR in West Bengal, it’s not hunky dory for the BJP either.
DK Singh is Political Editor at ThePrint. He tweets @dksingh73. Views are personal.
(Edited by Prashant Dixit)