fourth phase of the Lok Sabha election on May 13, the BJP candidate in Hyderabad,
Madhavi Latha, was captured on video asking niqab-wearing women voters to remove their face coverings so she could verify their identities.
Hyderabad Police
registered an FIR against Latha under IPC sections:
- Undue influence at an election (171C),
- Obstructing a public servant (186), and
- Intent to incite (505(1)(C)), and
- Section 132 of the Representation of the People Act, 1951 (misconduct at the polling station).
IDENTIFICATION OF THE WOMEN IN BURQA
Conducting
free and fair elections is the
ECI’s mandate, which includes ensuring no bogus votes are cast.
Polling officers are required to verify a voter’s appearance against the photo on the voter card,
if needed.
To ensure this is done while
also protecting the privacy of the woman elector in
ghoonghat/burqa/niqab, the ECI has issued
standing instructions for Returning Officers of constituencies and Presiding Officers of polling stations:
“If sufficiently large number of ‘pardanashin’ (burqa-clad) women electors are assigned to your Polling Station, you should make special arrangements for their identification and application of indelible ink on the left index finger by a lady Polling Officer in a separate enclosure having due regard to privacy, dignity, and decency.”
THE CANDIDATE’S ACTIONS
The
responsibility and right to verify the identity of voters lies with the ECI, not a contesting candidate.
Candidates or their polling agents
are allowed access to polling stations in the constituency, to ensure that the polling process is conducted without interference. However,
they are not permitted to intervene in the voting process.
Madhavi Latha’s action was viewed as interference and, therefore, at the ECI’s behest, she was booked by the police.
Test your understanding
Questions from this article
Prelims practiceWith reference to BJP Candidate From Hyderabad Summoned, consider the following statements:
- Undue influence at an election (171C),
- Obstructing a public servant (186), and
- Intent to incite (505(1)(C)), and
Which of the statements given above are correct?
- 1 and 2 only
- 2 and 3 only
- 1 and 3 only
- 1, 2 and 3
View answer
Answer: (d) 1, 2 and 3. All three statements are drawn from the article.
Mains practiceDiscuss the background, key issues and significance of BJP Candidate From Hyderabad Summoned for India.
Answer in 250 words.
View answer approach
- standing instructions for Returning Officers of constituencies and Presiding Officers of polling stations:
- Background and context
- Key facts and institutional framework
- Significance and way forward
Frequently asked questionsFrequently asked questions
Why is Bjp Candidate From Hyderabad Summoned in the news?
fourth phase of the Lok Sabha election on May 13, the BJP candidate in Hyderabad, Madhavi Latha, was captured on video asking niqab-wearing women voters to remove their face coverings so she could verify their identities. Hyderabad Police registered an FIR against Latha under IPC sections: Undue influence at an election (171C), Obstructing a public servant (186), and Intent to incite (505(1)(C)), and Section 132 of the Representation of the People Act, 1951 (misconduct at the…
What are the key facts about Bjp Candidate From Hyderabad Summoned?
IDENTIFICATION OF THE WOMEN IN BURQA Conducting free and fair elections is the ECI’s mandate, which includes ensuring no bogus votes are cast. Polling officers are required to verify a voter’s appearance against the photo on the voter card, if needed. To ensure this is done while also protecting the privacy of the woman elector in ghoonghat/burqa/niqab, the ECI has issued standing instructions for Returning Officers of constituencies and Presiding Officers of polling stations: “If sufficiently large number…
Why is Bjp Candidate From Hyderabad Summoned important for UPSC preparation?
The topic connects current developments with Polity & Governance and is relevant for both objective revision and analytical answer writing.