Election – Jammu and Kashmir Rajya Sabha Vote Row Deepens After RTI Findings
Election – The dispute surrounding alleged cross-voting during the October 2025 Rajya Sabha elections in Jammu and Kashmir has intensified, following new details disclosed through a Right to Information (RTI) response. The revelations have triggered fresh accusations among major political parties, with each side offering sharply different interpretations of the outcome.
RTI Disclosure Sparks Political Confrontation
According to the RTI response, the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP), which had three legislators in the Assembly at the time, did not appoint any authorised agents to oversee voting during the Rajya Sabha elections. This detail has become central to the ongoing political argument, particularly after the National Conference (NC) suggested that the absence of such agents may have enabled cross-voting.
The RTI reply from the Jammu and Kashmir Assembly Secretariat confirmed that only three parties—NC, Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), and Congress—had appointed authorised agents. In total, seven agents were deployed: four by NC, two by BJP, and one by Congress. No other party submitted a request to appoint agents for the election process.
Unexpected Election Outcome Raises Questions
The Rajya Sabha polls, held on October 24, 2025, were conducted to fill four vacant seats. Despite having the backing of 59 legislators, NC secured only three seats. The fourth seat was won by BJP candidate Sat Sharma, whose victory came as a surprise.
Sharma received 32 votes, exceeding BJP’s expected tally by four votes. Meanwhile, NC’s candidate Imran Nabi Dar secured only 21 votes, while three ballots were declared invalid. The discrepancy between expected and actual voting patterns has fueled suspicions of cross-party voting.
NC Alleges Cross-Voting by PDP Legislators
Following the RTI findings, NC leaders claimed that the absence of authorised agents allowed some legislators to vote against their declared position. Imran Nabi Dar publicly questioned the PDP’s role, suggesting that its legislators may have supported the BJP despite earlier assurances to back NC.
He pointed to possible motivations behind such actions, including political incentives or strategic alignments. NC representatives argued that the RTI response has strengthened their claim that the BJP’s additional votes did not emerge independently.
PDP Rejects Allegations, Clarifies Position
The PDP has firmly rejected these accusations. Party spokesperson Mohit Bhan stated that the PDP had not fielded any candidate in the election, and therefore had no obligation to appoint polling agents. He explained that agents are typically appointed by candidates rather than parties.
Bhan also emphasized that the PDP had extended unconditional support to the NC candidate. Under such circumstances, he argued, the issue of appointing agents did not arise.
However, NC leaders countered this explanation by pointing out that Congress, despite not fielding a candidate, had still appointed an agent. They maintained that appointing agents is essential for ensuring that party members follow official voting directions.
BJP Responds With Counter-Allegations
The BJP has dismissed claims that it benefited from PDP support. Party spokesperson Altaf Thakur alleged that any cross-voting in favor of BJP came from within the NC itself. He argued that dissatisfaction with NC’s governance and unmet promises may have influenced legislators’ decisions.
Thakur also stressed that ideological differences between BJP and PDP make cooperation unlikely. He reiterated that the PDP had no practical reason to appoint agents given its limited representation and lack of candidates.
Other Voices Add to the Debate
Sajjad Lone, chairman of the People’s Conference and an MLA who abstained from voting, also weighed in on the issue. Drawing from past experience, he noted that appointing authorised agents is a standard and crucial practice, even when a party does not field a candidate.
Lone suggested that both NC and PDP were aware of the rules but chose not to act accordingly. He raised the possibility that the election outcome may have involved broader coordination, although no direct evidence has been presented.
Unanswered Questions Continue to Linger
The controversy has now shifted toward identifying the legislators who may have cross-voted or cast invalid ballots. Despite growing public interest, there is no official confirmation regarding their identities.
As political parties continue to exchange accusations, the RTI findings have added a new layer of scrutiny to the election process. Whether further details will emerge remains uncertain, but the issue has already intensified political tensions in the region.