🧨THE SHOCKING REVELATION THAT DEMOCRACY CAN’T IGNORE

A leading figure of the bharatiya janata party (BJP) in delhi — santosh kumar Ojha — is now under the spotlight. His name appears in electoral rolls in two states; he allegedly voted in both: in Delhi’s february 2025 assembly polls and again in Bihar’s november 2025 polls. 

He supposedly holds two active EPIC numbers (Elector Photo Identity Cards) — one in delhi, one in Bihar. The opposition and civil society are calling it “vote theft”.

And yet, the entity tasked with safeguarding our elections appears to be silent.

This isn’t merely about one leader — it’s a crisis of electoral integrity, institutional failure, and impunity.

📍 THE ALLEGATIONS: WHAT WE KNOW

• The opposition party, aam aadmi party (AAP), has publicly accused Ojha and others of voting in both delhi and bihar — despite the ECI's claims that its roll-revision exercise (the SIR) would prevent duplicate registrations.

• 
  

• According to AAP’s delhi chief Saurabh Bharadwaj, Ojha’s instagram post on 6 Nov 2025 says: “Voted today with resolve for prosperous Buxar, empowered bihar, and developed India.” And earlier, on 5 Feb 2025, he had voted in Delhi. 

• 
  

• The AAP demands: How did this happen despite the SIR programme? If a person was registered in one state and then in another, where was the flag raised?

• 
  

• Meanwhile, the ECI has not publicly responded to these specific allegations. 

• 
  

🕵️ WHY THIS MATTERS: BEYOND ONE MAN

One person, two votes: symbol of a broader rot

If a senior party functionary can allegedly vote in two states, what stops thousands of others from doing the same? If the institution meant to prevent this fails, then the mechanism of democracy itself is at risk.

SIR and the failure of revision

The SIR (Special Intensive Revision) exercise by the ECI was billed as the “clean-up” of electoral rolls — eliminating duplicates, ghost voters, and multiple registrations.
Yet the fact that Ojha’s name surfaces in two states after the SIR rounds suggests the process may be faltering or compromised.

Impunity by design

The larger narrative around the ECI gaining immunity and power in recent reforms adds to the concern: If those entrusted to guard the institution of the vote are insulated from accountability, it raises the chilling question — who will hold them to account?

🔍 THE INSTITUTIONAL CRISIS: ECI & THE LAW

• Reports suggest that a law passed in 2023 gave full immunity from criminal prosecution to election Commissioners under certain conditions.

• 
  

• With that protection, the question looms: Does the ECI still answer to the people it serves?

• 
  

• When glitches, loopholes, or alleged collusion appear in the system, the public is left without a meaningful remedy.

• 
  

• The case of Santosh Ojha, thus, isn’t just about one leader’s misbehaviour — it is about a systemic breakdown where oversight is disabled, accountability muted, and errors tolerated.

• 
  

⚠️ THE DANGEROUS IMPLICATIONS

• Erosion of trust: If citizens believe votes can be duplicated, transferred, or manipulated with impunity, the very act of voting loses value.

• Unfair advantage: If one party’s leaders or workers exploit these loopholes, the playing field is tilted.

• Precedent for abuse: Perfectly legal on paper, but morally corrosive—two EPICs, multiple votes, one individual. Tomorrow it could be thousands.

• Democracy in danger: elections aren’t just about winning—they’re about legitimacy, representation, and consent of the governed. When the system fails, those foundations crumble.

• 
  

🧨 HARD QUESTIONS THAT DEMAND ANSWERS

• How did santosh kumar Ojha’s name remain active on two voters’ lists across two states when SIR was meant to eliminate such duplication?

• 
  

• What checks, if any, did the ECI or state electoral offices employ? Why were they bypassed or ineffective here?

• 
  

• What will the ECI do now? Will there be an investigation, consequences, and transparency?

• 
  

• If this is the fate of a high-profile leader, what about ordinary citizens? How widespread is this phenomenon?

• 
  

• And finally: If the watchdog is asleep, who safeguards our right to vote?

• 
  

🔥 THE FINAL WORD: WAKE UP OR WE LOSE OUR DEMOCRACY

santosh kumar Ojha’s alleged double-voting is not just a scandal—it’s a warning sign. A democracy that cannot ensure one person, one vote is no democracy at all.

The election commission of india must act — decisively, transparently, and with full accountability. No more half-answers, no more institutional silence. Because democracy doesn’t need cheerleaders, it needs watchdogs.

If the guardians of our vote are themselves beyond reproach, we are entering dangerous territory.
The next election isn’t just about which party wins — it’s about whether we still believe our vote matters.