Explore the 6 shocking proofs of electoral manipulation in the Bihar Election 2025. From the ₹10,000 cash transfer scheme to massive voter deletion, discover why critics claim this was the most unfair election in India’s history.
Table of Contents
The Core Allegation: “Vote Theft,” Not Defeat
The central argument presented is simple yet disturbing. The opposition did not lose because voters rejected them; they lost because the playing field was deliberately tilted. The speaker argues that while previous elections may have had isolated incidents of malpractice, the 2025 Bihar election witnessed “structural rigging” where the rules themselves were changed to favor the ruling party.
Here are the six specific proofs presented to support this claim.
Proof 1: The “Legalized Bribery” of ₹10,000
The most significant allegation involves the “Mukhyamantri Mahila Rojgar Yojana.” According to the claims, the state government transferred ₹10,000 directly into the bank accounts of 1.25 crore (12.5 million) women just days before voting—specifically on October 31 and November 7.
Why this matters:
This transfer was framed as a “small business grant,” but the timing is the critical issue. Occurring right before the polls, it functioned as an immediate financial inducement. Furthermore, voters were allegedly promised an additional ₹100,000 if the ruling party returned to power. Critics argue this violated the Model Code of Conduct, which strictly forbids new financial benefits after elections are announced. Unlike in Telangana or Tamil Nadu, where the Election Commission previously halted similar transfers, this scheme was allowed to proceed, raising questions about regulatory consistency.
Proof 2: The Mystery of Duplicate Voters
The second proof focuses on the integrity of the voter rolls. Investigative reports and social media evidence suggest that a massive number of individuals voted in multiple states.
The Evidence:
Photographs circulated online purportedly show ruling party workers casting votes in Delhi, Haryana, and then again in Bihar. A deeper data analysis allegedly found over 1.4 million (14 lakh) suspected duplicate entries in the final voter list. The speaker points out that the Election Commission possesses software specifically designed to de-duplicate these lists but chose not to deploy it effectively. This allowed a “floating population” of voters to artificially inflate the ruling party’s vote share in key constituencies.
Proof 3: Special “Voter Trains”
In a brazen display of resource mobilization, the ruling party is accused of organizing free “Special Trains” to transport thousands of voters from states like Haryana to Bihar.
The Violation:
Indian election law treats the provision of free transportation to voters as a “corrupt practice.” It is illegal for any candidate or party to ferry voters to polling stations. However, video evidence reportedly shows passengers on these trains admitting that their travel and food were fully paid for by the government or the party machinery. This organized logistics operation suggests a level of coordination that bypasses standard electoral spending limits.
Proof 4: Changing the Rules on Evidence (CCTV)
One of the most technical yet dangerous changes cited is the amendment regarding polling booth surveillance.
The Cover-Up:
Previously, CCTV footage from polling stations was considered a public document, accessible via court orders to verify allegations of booth capturing or fraud. The government recently amended the rules to remove CCTV footage from the list of public election documents.
Even more alarming is the EC’s new directive to delete all CCTV footage after just 45 days if no specific court case is filed. This creates a “statute of limitations” on truth; if fraud is discovered two months later, the digital evidence will have already been destroyed legally.
Proof 5: The “SIR” Voter Deletion Strategy
The “Special Intensive Revision” (SIR) of voter rolls is described as a surgical tool for disenfranchisement.
The Numbers:
The claim states that nearly 80 lakh (8 million) names were missing from the expected voter lists.
The Target:
The deletion was not random. The speaker alleges that the SIR process disproportionately targeted opposition strongholds, such as the Seemanchal region, and specific demographics including Muslims and Dalits. Thousands of genuine voters reportedly arrived at polling stations only to find their names deleted without notice. This “administrative targeted suppression” effectively reduced the opposition’s vote bank before a single ballot was cast.
Proof 6: The Compromised Referee
The final proof questions the neutrality of the Election Commission itself. The speaker argues the EC has transformed from a neutral umpire into an extension of the ruling party.
The Structural Change:
The government recently altered the selection process for Election Commissioners, removing the Chief Justice of India from the selection committee. This allows the government to hand-pick officials who are loyal to them.
Conflict of Interest:
Allegations also point to a direct conflict of interest, citing that the Chief Election Commissioner’s family members received prestigious government posts (such as DM of Noida) shortly after the controversial voter revision announcements. This suggests a “quid pro quo” arrangement that compromises the institution’s independence.
The Era of “Technical Rigging”
The speaker concludes with a stark warning: India is entering an era of “technical rigging.” Elections are no longer being fought on issues like pollution, unemployment, or infrastructure. Instead, they are being managed through data manipulation, legal loopholes, and administrative bias.
The result is a government that is legally immune protected by new laws that shield Election Commissioners from civil suits and politically unaccountable. The speaker urges citizens to recognize that this is not “just politics” but a fundamental erosion of their right to choose. Silence, they argue, is no longer an option.
Conclusion
The allegations around the 2025 Bihar election raise one central worry. Many critics believe the problem was not political defeat but a system that no longer treated every voter equally. They argue that cash transfers timed right before voting, unexplained duplicate entries, free transport for select groups, sudden rule changes on CCTV access, large-scale voter deletions, and questions about the neutrality of the Election Commission all point to a deeper shift.
If even part of these claims is true, the implications are serious. Elections work only when people trust the process. When voters feel their names can be removed without warning, or that evidence can disappear before it is examined, confidence weakens. When rules for public spending or voter movement appear unevenly enforced, people begin to wonder whether results reflect their choices at all.
The critics’ message is clear. They believe India is moving from visible malpractice to quieter, more technical methods that are harder to detect and even harder to challenge. Their conclusion is not that one party won or lost, but that the system itself may be drifting away from fairness.
Source: Candidates won’t get poll booth CCTV footage: EC & Bihar Elections were a SCAM! Here’s the Proof
Read Also: How Caste and Class Shaped the 2025 Bihar Election Results & Rahul Gandhi Claims Vote Theft in Haryana Election, Sparks Political Row
