Raghav Chadha Alleges 'Vendetta' Over Punjab Voter List; AAP Points to Election Commission

New Delhi: A disagreement has surfaced between Rajya Sabha member Raghav Chadha and his party, the Aam Aadmi Party (AAP), over an issue concerning the draft electoral rolls of Punjab. Chadha has alleged that his voter status has been marked as “shifted” in the draft list, calling it an act of political vendetta. The party, however, has responded by stating that electoral roll revision is the responsibility of the Election Commission of India (ECI), not the government or the party.

The controversy emerged after the ECI published the draft voter list for Punjab earlier this week. Chadha, who represents the state in the Rajya Sabha, discovered that his name carried the annotation “shifted” against his address in his home constituency. In a series of social media posts, he claimed that he continues to reside at the registered address and that the tag appears designed to remove his name from the electorate.

“This is a clear attempt to disenfranchise me politically. I have lived at the same address for years. The 'shifted' status is false and malicious,” Chadha said, demanding immediate correction. He also urged his supporters to check their own entries in the draft rolls to ensure no similar errors had occurred.

When approached for a response, the AAP distanced itself from Chadha’s allegations. A party spokesperson said that voter list preparation and revision are entirely conducted by the Election Commission under the Representation of the People Act, 1950. “The AAP has no role in the process. If any individual, including our leaders, has a grievance, they are free to approach the election authorities and file a claim or objection,” the spokesperson said.

The exchange underscores a rare public difference between the MP and the party on a sensitive electoral matter. Political analysts note that AAP governs Punjab, and any perceived interference in the electoral roll could invite scrutiny, especially in a state with a history of polarised politics.

To understand the controversy, it is useful to look at what the “shifted” tag means. Electoral laws and the Election Commission’s handbook for electoral registration officers describe a voter as “shifted” when, based on door-to-door verification, the person is found to have relocated outside the polling area or constituency. A provisional notation is entered in the draft roll. However, this is not the final word.

During the period the draft roll is open for public inspection, any voter whose name is incorrectly marked, or omitted, may file a claim or objection with the electoral registration officer (ERO) of their constituency. The ERO is empowered to verify the details, often through physical verification or documentation, and may order the correction before finalisation of the rolls.

According to the Election Commission’s rules, a draft roll is published in every assembly constituency of the state. Citizens have the right to submit claims for inclusion of names, objections to incorrect entries, and requests for deletion of duplicates or shifted entries. The commission periodically updates rolls to keep them accurate and to remove cases of multiple registration or changes of residence.

In the present instance, Chadha says he will file a formal objection with the ERO. His party’s stance, though, suggests that it does not see the issue as a political conspiracy but rather as a routine procedural matter that must be resolved through the legal process.

The controversy also draws attention to the broader need for transparent and error-free voter lists. Election watchdog groups have repeatedly stressed that even minor mistakes can affect a voter’s right to exercise their franchise. In a democracy, the accuracy of electoral rolls is fundamental to free and fair elections.

As the process moves forward, all eyes will be on how the Election Commission handles Chadha’s complaint. The commission, for its part, has not issued any statement yet. Meanwhile, both AAP and Chadha appear keen to avoid any suggestion of interference with election machinery, though their interpretations of the incident differ sharply.

The episode serves as a reminder that voter list revisions are legally bound procedures. Nonetheless, when political figures raise allegations of vendetta, public confidence in the electoral system can be shaken. The resolution rests on a transparent and impartial examination of the facts.