Press Release :Lok Sabha Elections 2024 Phase II : Analysis of Criminal Background, Financial, Education, Gender and other Details of Candidates

115 views

Skip to first unread message

ADR India

unread,

Apr 16, 2024, 4:10:18 AMApr 16

to national-el...@googlegroups.com, national...@googlegroups.com

Press Release

Date: April 16, 2024

Dear Friends,

Association for Democratic Reforms (ADR) and The National Election Watch have analysed the self-sworn affidavits of 1192 out of 1198 candidates, who are contesting in the Lok Sabha Elections 2024 Phase II.

The full reports in English and Hindi can be accessed here: https://adrindia.org/content/analysis-criminal-background-financial-education-gender-and-other-details-candidates-lok-2

Summary and Highlights

Criminal Background

Candidates with Criminal Cases: 250 (21%) out of 1192 candidates have declared criminal cases against themselves.

Candidates with Serious Criminal Cases: 167 (14%) out of 1192 have declared serious criminal cases against themselves.

Top 3 Candidates with Maximum Declared Criminal Cases:

S.No.	State	Constituency	Candidate Name	Party	Total Cases	Serious IPC
1	Kerala	Wayanad	K Surendran	BJP	243	139
2	Kerala	Ernakulam	Dr. K. S. Radhakrishnan	BJP	211	5
3	Kerala	Idukki	Adv. Dean Kuriakose	INC	88	23

Table: Top three candidates with Maximum Declared Criminal Cases

Candidates with Declared Convicted Cases: 32 candidates have declared cases where they have been convicted.

Candidates with cases related to Murder: 3 candidates have declared cases related to murder (IPC Section -302) against themselves.

Candidates with cases related to Attempt to Murder: 24 candidates have declared cases related to attempt to murder (IPC Section 307) against themselves.

Candidates with cases related to Crime Against Women: 25 candidates have declared cases related to crime against women. Out of 25 candidates 1 candidate has declared case related to rape (IPC Section-376).

Candidates with cases related to Hate Speech: 21 candidates have declared cases related to hate speech against themselves.

Figure: Category Wise Candidates with Declared Criminal Cases

Party wise Candidates with Criminal Cases: Among the major parties, 5(100%) out of 5 candidates from CPI, 4(100%) out of 4 candidates from SP, 14(78%) out of 18 candidates from CPI(M), 2(67%) out of 3 candidates from Shiv Sena, 35(51%) out of 68 candidates from INC, 2(50%) out of 4 candidates from Shivsena (Uddhav Balasaheb Thackeray), 31(45%) out of 69 candidates from BJP and 2 (40%) out of 5 candidates from JD(U) have declared criminal cases against themselves.

Figure: Major Party Wise Candidates with Declared Criminal Cases

Party wise Candidates with Serious Criminal Cases: Among the major parties, 3(60%) out of 5 candidates from CPI, 2(50%) out of 4 candidates from SP, 7(39%) out of 18 candidates from CPI(M), 22(32%) out of 68 candidates from INC, 21(30%) out of 69 candidates from BJP, 1(25%) out of 4 candidates from Shivsena (Uddhav Balasaheb Thackeray) and 1 (20%) out of 5 candidates from JD(U) have declared serious criminal cases against themselves.

Red Alert Constituencies*: 45(52%) out of 87 constituencies are red alert constituencies in the Lok Sabha elections 2024 phase II. Red alert constituencies are those constituencies where 3 or more contesting candidates have declared criminal cases against themselves.

The directions of the Supreme Court have had no effect on the political parties in selection of candidates in the Lok Sabha Elections 2024 Phase II as they have again followed their old practice of giving tickets to around 21% candidates with criminal cases. All major parties contesting in Lok Sabha Elections Phase 2 have given tickets from 40 % to 100 % candidates who have declared criminal cases against themselves. The Supreme Court in its directions dated 13th February, 2020 had specifically instructed political parties to give reasons for such selection and why other individuals without criminal antecedents could not be selected as candidates. As per these mandatory guidelines, the reasons for such selection has to be with reference to qualifications, achievements and merit of the candidate concerned. During the recent 5 State Assembly elections held in 2023, it was observed that political parties gave unfounded and baseless reasons like popularity of the person, does good social work, cases are politically motivated etc. These are not sound and cogent reasons for fielding candidates with tainted backgrounds. This data clearly shows that political parties have no interest in reforming the electoral system and our democracy will continue to suffer at the hands of lawbreakers who become lawmakers.

Financial Background

Figure: Share of wealth amongst contesting candidates

Share of wealth among candidates: The share of wealth amongst the candidates contesting in the Lok Sabha Phase II elections is as follows:

Value of assets (Rs.)	Number of candidates	Percentage of Candidates
Rs.5 cr and above	140	12%
Rs.2 crores to Rs. 5 crores	112	9%
Rs. 50 lakhs to Rs. 2 crores	276	23%
Rs.10 lakhs to Rs. 50 lakhs	311	26%
less than Rs. 10 lakhs	353	30%

Table: Share of wealth amongst contesting candidates

Crorepati Candidates: Out of the 1192 candidates, 390 (33%) are Crorepatis.

Party wise Crorepati Candidates: Among the major parties 5(100%) out of 5 candidates from JD(U), 4(100%) out of 4 candidates from AITC, 4(100%) out of 4 candidates from Shivsena (Uddhav Balasaheb Thackeray), 4(100%) out of 4 candidates from SP, 3(100%) out of 3 candidates from Shiv Sena, 64(93%) out of 69 candidates from BJP, 62(91%) out of 68 candidates from INC, 12(67%) out of 18 candidates from CPI(M) and 2 (40%) candidates out of 5 candidates analysed from CPI have declared assets worth more than Rs. 1 crore.

Figure: Party Wise Percentage of Crorepati Candidates

Average assets: The average asset per candidate contesting in the Lok Sabha phase II election is Rs.5.17 crores.

Party wise average assets: Among major parties, the average assets per candidate for 68 INC candidates is Rs. 39.70 crores, 69 BJP candidates is Rs 24.68 crores, 4 SP candidates have average assets of Rs 17.34 crores, 4 Shivsena (Uddhav Balasaheb Thackeray) candidates have average assets worth Rs 12.81 crores, 3 Shiv Sena candidates have average assets worth Rs 7.54 crores, 4 AITC candidates have average assets worth Rs 4.16 crores, 5 JD(U) candidates have average assets worth Rs 3.31 crores, 18 CPI(M) candidates have average assets worth Rs 2.29 crores and 5 CPI candidates have average assets of Rs 78.44 lakhs.

High assets candidates: The details of top 3 candidates with highest declared assets, contesting in the Lok Sabha Elections Phase II are given below:

S.No.	Name	State	Constituency	Party Name	Movable Assets (Rs)	Immovable Assets (Rs)	Total Assets (Rs)	PAN Given
1	Venkataramane Gowda (Star Chandru)	Karnataka	Mandya	INC	2,12,78,08,148	4,10,19,20,693	6,22,97,28,841 622 Crore+	Y
2	D K Suresh	Karnataka	Bangalore Rural	INC	1,06,71,89,791	4,86,33,35,604	5,93,05,25,395 593 Crore+	Y
3	Hemamalini Dharmendra Deol	Uttar Pradesh	Mathura	BJP	29,25,43,804	2,49,68,24,423	2,78,93,68,227 278 Crore+	Y

Table: Top three candidates with highest declared assets

Zero Assets Candidates: There are 6 candidates who have declared zero assets.
Low assets candidates: The details of three candidates with lowest assets (excluding zero assets candidates) are as follows:

S.No.	Name	State	Constituency	Party Name	Movable Assets (Rs)	Immovable Assets (Rs)	Total Assets (Rs)	PAN Given
1	Laxman Nagorao Patil	Maharashtra	Nanded	IND	500	0	500 5 Hund+	Y
2	Rajeswari K. R.	Kerala	Kasaragod	IND	1,000	0	1,000 1 Thou+	Y
3	Adv. Pruthvisamrat Mukindrao Dipwansh	Maharashtra	Amravati (SC)	IND	1,400^*	0	1,400 1 Thou+	Y

Table: Candidates with declared lowest assets

* On assets value indicates that the candidate has not provided the total in their affidavits, it has been calculated on the basis of details provided by them in the same

Candidates with high liabilities: 595(50%) candidates have declared liabilities in their affidavits. The details of top three candidates with highest liabilities are given below:

S.No.	Name	State	Constituency	Party Name	Total Assets (Rs)	Liabilities (Rs)	Disputed liabilities (Rs)	PAN Given
1	D K Suresh	Karnataka	Bangalore Rural	INC	5,93,05,25,395 593 Crore+	# 1,50,06,26,994 150 Crore+	57,27,49,212 57 Crore+	Y
2	Sanjay Sharma Sanju Bhaiya	Madhya Pradesh	Hoshangabad	INC	2,32,72,79,636 232 Crore+	98,91,79,205 98 Crore+	0	Y
3	H.D. Kumaraswamy	Karnataka	Mandya	Janata Dal (Secular)	2,17,23,28,789 217 Crore+	82,18,06,608 82 Crore+	0	Y

Table: top 3 candidates with high liabilities

# Disputed liabilities

Undeclared PAN: 47 candidates have not given PAN details.

Candidates with high income as declared in the ITR*:. The details of top 3 candidates with high income declared in ITR are given below:

S.No.	Name	Party Name	Constituency	State	Total Assets (Rs)	Self-Source of Income	Spouse's Source of Income	The financial year for which the last income tax return has been filed by candidate	Total income shown by candidate in ITR (Self+Spouse+Dependent) (Rs)	Self-income shown by candidate in ITR (Rs)
1	Venkataramane Gowda (Star Chandru)	INC	Mandya	Karnataka	6,22,97,28,841 622 Crore+	Business lncome, lnterest lncome, and Rental lncome	Business lncome, lnterest lncome, and Rental lncome	2022-2023	55,09,60,929 55 Crore+	16,28,22,070 16 Crore+
2	D K Suresh	INC	Bangalore Rural	Karnataka	5,93,05,25,395 593 Crore+	Rent, salary, capital gain, agricultural income and other sources (such as bank interest)	NA	2022-2023	12,30,04,200 12 Crore+	12,30,04,200 12 Crore+
3	Mansoor Ali Khan	INC	Bangalore Central	Karnataka	97,33,33,614 97 Crore+	Business	Business	2022-2023	7,46,85,420 7 Crore+	2,63,73,760 2 Crore+

Table: Top 3 Candidates with highest income declared in ITR

*Some Candidates may be exempted from filing ITR

** As per section 10 (26) of IT Act 1961, a member of ST residing in a specific area in Arunachal Pradesh, Manipur, Mizoram, Nagaland, Tripura or Ladakh in Jammu and Kashmir is exempt from paying IT.

Other Background Details

Education details of candidates: 533(45%) candidates have declared their educational qualifications to be between 5^th and 12^thstandard while 574(48%) candidates have declared having an educational qualification of graduate or above. 37 candidates are Diploma holders. 37 candidates have declared themselves to be just literate and 8 candidates are Illiterates. 3 candidates have not given their educational qualifications.

Age details of candidates: 363(30%) candidates have declared their age to be between 25 to 40 years while 578 (48%) candidates have declared their age to be between 41 to 60 years. There are 249(21%) candidates who have declared their age to be between 61 to 80 years. 2 candidates have declared their age to be above 80 years.

Gender details of candidates: 100(8%) female candidates are contesting in the Lok Sabha Phase II elections.

Recommendations of ADR

To remedy the existing problem of criminalization is to immediately act upon the plausible solutions offered by various committees, civil society and citizens. The Supreme Court of India being the ultimate custodian of “Justice and Rule of Law” should reprimand political parties and politicians for their complete lack of will, reprehensible predilection and absence of required laws.
Permanent disqualification of candidates convicted for heinous crimes like murder, rape, smuggling, dacoity, kidnapping etc.
Disqualification of persons from contesting elections to the public offices against whom charges have been framed for having committed serious criminal offences punishable by imprisonment of at least 5 years, and the case is filed at least 6 months prior to the election in question.
Cancellation of tax exemptions given to the political parties who field such tainted candidates.
Bringing political parties under the Right to Information Act.
De-register and de-recognise any political party if it knowingly puts up a candidate with a tainted background.
Political party should annually file the information on criminal antecedents of their Office Bearers and make such records available to the public, including NIL records.
Disqualification of candidates furnishing false information in the election affidavit (Form 26).
Ensure trial of cases in which the politicians are accused to be concluded in a time bound manner.
Implementation of SC judgment dated 23^rd September, 2013 (i.e provision of NOTA buttons on the EVMs) in its letter and spirit by ensuring a) if NOTA gets more votes than any of the candidates, none of the candidates should be declared elected, and a fresh election should be held; b) in the fresh election, none of the candidates in the earlier election, in which NOTA got the highest number of votes, should be allowed to contest.
Implementation of the 25^th September, 2018 and 13^th February, 2020 SC orders on 'publication of criminal cases against candidates selected by political parties along with reasons for such selection' in its letter and spirit by directing the Election Commission of India a) to list out names of such tainted candidates selected by the political parties along with such reasons for such selection C8 including diligent publication of reasons in newspapers, T.V channels, party website etc, b) strict and constant reminders by ROs to the defaulters, c) list needs to be religiously prepared and submitted to the Supreme Court after every election, d) uploading of this list on ECI’s website for public inspection, e) a suitably heavy financial penalty levied on political parties for making insufficient disclosures, invalid and common reasons, selection of candidates based on winnability and f) Officer in-charge of a political party pertaining to submission of a compliance report should also be held accountable for such a breach.
The Election Commission of India and all State Election Commissions should make it mandatory in all elections; Parliamentary, Assembly and Local Body elections to carry display boards outside each and every polling booth showing a summarised version of candidates’ affidavits. The polling booths should essentially display details of candidate’s criminal records, assets and liabilities and education qualification.
The Election Commission of India under its ‘Systematic Voters’ Education and Electoral Participation’ (SVEEP) as well as through other national campaigns on voter awareness held before every election should inform and aware the voters that (i) taking and giving cash or gifts/freebies for votes is a criminal offense, (ii) such instances should be brought to the notice of the ECI through its web application, (iii) inform voters that information on criminal records of candidates is available on the ECI website, outside polling booths and other sources that the ECI may use.
Political parties in India should be required to announce/publish the list of candidates contesting elections at least 3 months prior to elections.
Role of money and muscle power is evident from the fact that all major political parties in Lok Sabha Elections 2024 Phase 2 have fielded 40% to 100% candidates who are crorepatis and 40% to 100 % candidates who have declared criminal cases against themselves. This close and alarming nexus between money power and muscle power has got so ingrained in our electoral system that the citizens are left hostage to the current situation. Money and muscle power hurt the principles of 'free and fair elections', 'participatory democracy' and 'level playing field'. The present circumstances therefore demand an extensive deliberation by the voters so that sanctity of elections is not ridiculed by tenacious entry of tainted candidates and candidates with abnormal multiplication of assets.