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

0 views

Skip to first unread message

ADR India

unread,

May 16, 2024, 2:46:40 AMMay 16

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

Press Release

Date: May 16, 2024

Dear Friends,

Association for Democratic Reforms (ADR) and National Election Watch have analysed the self-sworn affidavits of 866 out of 869 candidates, who are contesting in the Lok Sabha Elections 2024 Phase VI.

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-9

Summary and Highlights

Criminal Background

Candidates with Criminal Cases: 180(21%) out of 866 candidates have declared criminal cases against themselves.

Candidates with Serious Criminal Cases: 141(16%) out of 866 have declared serious criminal cases against themselves.

Candidates with Declared Convicted Cases: 12 candidates have declared cases where they have been convicted.

Candidates with cases related to Murder: 6 candidates have declared cases related to murder (IPC Section -302) against themselves.

Candidates with cases related to Attempt to Murder: 21 candidates have declared cases related to attempt to murder (IPC Section 307) against themselves.

Candidates with cases related to Crime Against Women: 24 candidates have declared cases related to crime against women. Out of 24 candidates 3 candidates have declared charges related to rape (IPC Section-376) and Whoever commits rape repeatedly on the same woman, shall be punished with rigorous imprisonment for a term which shall not be less than ten years, but may extend to imprisonment (IPC Section-376(2)(n)).

Candidates with cases related to Hate Speech: 16 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 AAP, 4(100%) out of 4 candidates from RJD, 9(75%) out of 12 candidates from SP, 28(55%) out of 51 candidates from BJP, 4(44%) out of 9 candidates from AITC, 2(33%) out of 6 candidates from BJD and 8 (32%) out of 25 candidates from INC 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, 4(100%) out of 4 candidates from RJD, 4(80%) out of 5 candidates from AAP, 9(75%) out of 12 candidates from SP, 18(35%) out of 51 candidates from BJP, 3(33%) out of 9 candidates from AITC, 2(33%) out of 6 candidates from BJD and 6 (24%) out of 25 candidates from INC have declared serious criminal cases against themselves.

Red Alert Constituencies*: 35(61%) out of 57 constituencies are red alert constituencies in the Lok Sabha elections 2024 phase VI. 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 VI 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 6 have given tickets from 32 % 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 VI elections is as follows:

Value of assets (Rs.)	Number of candidates	Percentage of Candidates
Rs.5 cr and above	120	14%
Rs.2 crores to Rs. 5 crores	114	13%
Rs. 50 lakhs to Rs. 2 crores	191	22%
Rs.10 lakhs to Rs. 50 lakhs	220	25%
less than Rs. 10 lakhs	221	26%

Table: Share of wealth amongst contesting candidates

Crorepati Candidates: Out of the 866 candidates, 338(39%) are Crorepatis.

Party wise Crorepati Candidates: Among the major parties 6(100%) out of 6 candidates from BJD, 4(100%) out of 4 candidates from RJD, 4(100%) out of 4 candidates from JD(U), 48(94%) out of 51 candidates from BJP, 11(92%) out of 12 candidates from SP, 20(80%) out of 25 candidates from INC, 4(80%) out of 5 candidates from AAP and 7 (78%) candidates out of 9 candidates analysed from AITC have declared assets worth more than Rs. 1 crore.

Figure: Party Wise Percentage of Crorepati Candidates

Average assets: The average assets per candidate contesting in the Lok Sabha phase VI election is Rs.6.21 crores.

Party wise average assets: Among major parties, the average assets per candidate for 6 BJD candidates is Rs. 95.69 crores, 5 AAP candidates is Rs. 43.34 crores, 51 BJP candidates is Rs. 42.21 crores, 4 RJD candidates is Rs 27.63 crores, 25 INC candidates have average assets of Rs 15.13 crores, 12 SP candidates have average assets worth Rs 13.56 crores, 9 AITC candidates have average assets worth Rs 8.48 crores and 4 JD(U) candidates have average assets of Rs 4.45 crores.
High assets candidates: The details of top 3 candidates with highest declared assets, contesting in the Lok Sabha Elections Phase VI are given below:

S.No.	Name	State	Constituency	Party Name	Movable Assets (Rs)	Immovable Assets (Rs)	Total Assets (Rs)	PAN Given
1	Naveen Jindal	Haryana	Kurukshetra	BJP	12,30,41,87,000	11,05,81,000	12,41,47,68,000 1241 Crore+	Y
2	Santrupt Misra	Odisha	Cuttack	BJD	4,20,46,42,948	61,74,60,000	4,82,21,02,948 482 Crore+	Y
3	Dr Sushil Gupta	Haryana	Kurukshetra	AAP	73,37,07,188	96,20,65,840	1,69,57,73,028 169 Crore+	Y

Table: Top three candidates with highest declared assets

Low assets candidates: The details of three candidates with lowest assets are as follows:

S.No.	Name	State	Constituency	Party Name	Movable Assets (Rs)	Immovable Assets (Rs)	Total Assets (Rs)	PAN Given
1	Master Randhir Singh	Haryana	Rohtak	IND	2	0	2	Y
2	Ram Kumar Yadav	Uttar Pradesh	Pratapgarh	SUCI(C)	1,686	0	1,686 1 Thou+	Y
3	Khilkhilakar	Delhi (NCT)	North West Delhi (SC)	Bahujan Shoshit Samaj Sangharsh Samta Party	2,000	0	2,000 2 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: 411(47%) 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	Raaj Kumar Anand	Delhi (NCT)	New Delhi	BSP	83,57,25,650 83 Crore+	35,55,17,833 35 Crore+	0	Y
2	Naina Singh Chautala	Haryana	Hisar	Jannayak Janta Party	1,39,71,45,811 139 Crore+	21,73,97,975 21 Crore+	92,75,535 92 Lacs+	Y
3	Veena Devi	Bihar	Vaishali	Lok Janshakti Party(Ram Vilas)	46,71,70,049 46 Crore+	16,47,62,876 16 Crore+	0	Y

Table: top 3 candidates with high liabilities

Undeclared PAN: 11 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	Naveen Jindal	BJP	Kurukshetra	Haryana	12,41,47,68,000 1241 Crore+	Advisory fee, Interest. Dividend & pension Income	Advisory Fee, interest & Dividend Income	2022-2023	84,17,88,117 84 Crore+	74,83,99,731 74 Crore+
2	Santrupt Misra	BJD	Cuttack	Odisha	4,82,21,02,948 482 Crore+	From Interest on Investments	Salary	2022-2023	66,67,67,940 66 Crore+	66,21,97,170 66 Crore+
3	Adhikari Deepak (Dev)	AITC	Ghatal	West Bengal	37,13,47,069 37 Crore+	Professional Fees, Salary as Member of Parliament, Interest Income, Rental Income	NA	2022-2023	4,99,15,770 4 Crore+	4,99,15,770 4 Crore+

Table: Top 3 Candidates with highest income declared in ITR

*Some Candidates may be exempted from filing ITR

Other Background Details

Education details of candidates: 332(38%) candidates have declared their educational qualifications to be between 5^th and 12^thstandard while 487(56%) candidates have declared having an educational qualification of graduate or above. 22 candidates are Diploma holders. 12 candidates have declared themselves to be just literate and 13 candidates are Illiterates.

Age details of candidates: 271(31%) candidates have declared their age to be between 25 to 40 years while 436(50%) candidates have declared their age to be between 41 to 60 years. There are 159(18%) candidates who have declared their age to be between 61 to 80 years.

Gender details of candidates: 92(11%) female candidates are contesting in the Lok Sabha Phase VI 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 parties 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 VI have fielded 78% to 100% candidates who are crorepatis and 32% 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.