Speaking to The Sunday Guardian, the former chief of the Election Commission of India reveals then Prime Minister Manmohan Singh’s extraordinary reactions. He also questions the ongoing SIR process.
Former Chief Election Commissioner, SY Quraishi in his new book titled ‘India and I’ had recalled a stark statement made by former Prime Minister Dr Manmohan Singh in 2012 over “loose talk” by some of his ministers on the functioning of the Election Commission of India dubbing it as arrogant.
Quraishi also questioned the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of the voter rolls process being carried out by the poll panel saying that this process removed lakhs of bonafide citizens of India without voting right and someone should be held accountable for such a gross injustice.
In an exclusive interview to The Sunday Guardian, Quraishi recalling the incident said that it was in 2012, when Union Law Minister Salman Khurshid while campaigning for his wife had announced to double the minority quota. And BJP, which was alert immediately raised that issue with the Commission. Then we called both the parties and we carried out the hearing for four days in which all top lawyers from both sides were present to argue. Then we reached the conclusion that the model code of conduct was violated and as we cannot punish anyone thus we decided to put “censure” on Khurshid, the strongest action available under the Code.
Quraishi said that after a few days we came to know that four to five senior leaders were doing loose talks about the Election Commission and me.
“They even said that the commission had become arrogant and arbitrary. So I decided to tell the same to Prime Minister’s press secretary Harish Khare during a programme. He asked me if he should tell it to the Prime Minister and I said yes,” the former Chief Election Commissioner said.
“Then I received a call on my landline from the Prime Minister and he asked to see me at 7 p.m. I went to the Prime Minister’s residence and he himself was.there at the gate to receive me. He led me in and, before we had even settled, said in a voice that carried genuine anguish: ‘Harish told me what you said. If that is what you think, I will commit suicide’,” Quraishi recalled.
He said that he was left stunned and was speechless.
“My remark was about some ministers’ conduct, not about him. Dr Singh had consistently praised the Election Commission as ‘India’s pride’, and our soft power. That he could imagine, even for a moment, that I doubted his intentions was unbearable to him,” he said, adding that this showed how much Dr Manmohan Singh was sensitive towards the Election Commission and this incident also showed his character as he on number of occasions had said that the Election Commission is the pride of India.
Quraishi has included 100 memoirs of his 40 years of bureaucratic life in the new book.
When asked about whether the Election Commission for full freedom under Manmohan Singh led UPA government, he nodded in yes and said that look what is happening today I cannot comment on that.
“But at that time there was no question of any pressure from anyone in the government on the functioning of the Election Commission,” Quraishi said, adding that the biggest example of that is that we had censured the Union Law Minister for violation of model code of conduct and there was no pressure put by the government on the poll panel.
To another question that there were many instances when it was reportedly said that then Congress president Sonia Gandhi used to have her say on the functioning of the government, did he ever feel the same, he said, “No. Never. The reputation of the Election Commission was very intact. None from the opposition or the ruling party used to put pressure or put allegations of bias. They all knew well that if they tried to put pressure on the commission then it would boomerang. And the result was no one dated directly or indirectly to put pressure.”
Responding to a question about Dimple Yadav winning in 2012 bypolls unopposed and if her election was fair and transparent, Quraishi said that I recall her winning unopposed as two or three candidates had withdrawn themselves out of respect for their leader.
“Despite her victory not becoming a controversy, we got it checked if the candidates had withdrawn on their own, and we found it to be a genuine case,” Quraishi said.
When asked about the misuse of money power in elections, the former Chief Election Commissioner said: “When I was appointed as the CEC, I had put two challenges before myself. One is voter apathy and another use of money power in elections.
He said that people in urban areas used to say that they didn’t go to vote but everytime they questioned the government.
“So we decided to embarrass such voters and give them a message that if they are not voting then they don’t have the right to criticise the government while sitting in their drawing rooms. I even formed the voter education division, to educate voters to go out and vote titled SVEEP (Systematic Voter Education for Electoral Participation). We carried out this programme across the country and its impact was immense as in the 2010 Bihar election, record voter turnout was recorded,” he said recalling how a small programme initiative helped the poll panel to educate voters and make them aware of the power of their one vote.
Talking about the misuse of money power in elections, Quraishi said that during elections it is the job of the election commission to provide a level playing field to all parties and candidates. Thus I decided to form a new division with a DG from the Income Tax to overlook the work of the Expenditure and Monitoring Division. Then we also brought new rules and started implementing the rules strictly. Following which we came to know about 40 modus operandi of the misuse of money power during elections.
Explaining an interesting way of misuse of money, Quraishi said that we found a unique marriage, where there was no bride or groom and over 3,000 to 4,000 people gathered at the marriage venue, who were served food and liquor.
“This was a unique way of bribing voters,” he said, adding that a sitting Chief Minister at that time had told his leaders that it was really tough for him to send Rs 20,000 from Chandigarh to Delhi due to the strictness of the Election Commission,” the former CEC said, adding that we carried out raids at hotels, helicopters used in campaigning, farmhouses and recovered huge cash.
He also opined that now the modus operandi must have changed in the last few years, but the EC faces a tough task of putting a curb on the misuse of money during elections.
To a question about US President Donald Trump and Elon Musk raising questions on the Election Commission’s Memorandum of Understanding with the US, Quraishi said, “In 2012, I had exactly thirteen days left as Chief Election Commissioner when we signed an MoU with the International Foundation for Electoral Systems (IFES), Washington, D.C. And this MoU was meant to give training to other countries on how we ensure free and fair elections and for which there would be no legal or financial obligation on either side. The MoU was professional and transparent.”
He explained that IFES, a non-government organization, works in over 150 countries to strengthen democratic processes and it received funding from USAID, with whom India had excellent relations.
“I signed the MoU with its chairman, Bill Sweeney. The purpose was simple and unexceptionable. I had recently set up the IIIDEM. The idea was ambitious: besides training our 12 million election personnel, India would share its electoral experience with election managers from other countries, free of cost. Democracy was an export India could afford to give generously.
“In a five-page document, such a clause normally appears once. We included it twice. Uncanny, in hindsight,” he said, adding that, however, the practical difficulty was obvious as we couldn’t have funded their travel and stay and election officials would not travel to
days left as Chief Election Commissioner when we signed an MoU with the International Foundation for Electoral Systems (IFES), Washington, D.C. And this MoU was meant to give training to other countries on how we ensure free and fair elections and for which there would be no legal or financial obligation on either side. The MoU was professional and transparent.”
He explained that IFES, a non-government organization, works in over 150 countries to strengthen democratic processes and it received funding from USAID, with whom India had excellent relations.
“I signed the MoU with its chairman, Bill Sweeney. The purpose was simple and unexceptionable. I had recently set up the IIIDEM. The idea was ambitious: besides training our 12 million election personnel, India would share its electoral experience with election managers from other countries, free of cost. Democracy was an export India could afford to give generously.
“In a five-page document, such a clause normally appears once. We included it twice. Uncanny, in hindsight,” he said, adding that, however, the practical difficulty was obvious as we couldn’t have funded their travel and stay and election officials would not travel to India merely to learn about Indian elections.
Thus, they wanted training relevant to their own contexts. IFES agreed to bring international participants and provide expertise to customize programmes, but after 13 years, in 2025, after Trump returned to the White House and Musk headed a new Department of Government Efficiency, USAID funding to IFES came under attack and was stopped.
“In that changed climate, India was dragged into an absurd narrative, as if Indian elections were ‘handed over’ to America,” Quraishi remarked.
He said, “Not a single penny was taken by the Election Commission. But many of the media houses pounced immediately alleging that the Chief Election Commissioner being Muslim had long been an unspoken irritant.
“Some television channels questioned my integrity and patriotism without even reading the MoU they were frantically waving on screen. The ‘no legal or financial obligation’ clause might as well have been invisible and whatever Trump or Musk said we’re complete lies,” he said.
Quraishi also said that India has been Vishva Guru in 143 countries, as the election commission has trained their people without taking a single penny from them or spending a single rupee.
To a question about the memoir in his book titled Muslim Commissioner, and targeted for keeping his views on Waqf Amendment Act, Quraishi said, “After the Waqf Amendment Act Bill, I had written about in on social media that how this Bill was meant to surprise the properties of Waqf. Then a BJP MP, whose name I don’t want to take, responded in a very distasteful style and mentioned me as a “Muslim Commissioner”.
“With very pride I say that I was the Chief Election Commissioner of India. I was not a Muslim Commissioner. Though I am a proud Muslim. I don’t want to go into Muslim or a non Muslim, but my integrity was highlighted by a very stalwart of BJP, the late Arun Jaitley, who had said that I was one of the best Election Commissioners. Even Gopal Krishna Gandhi,the grandson of Mahatma Gandhi had also said that I was one of the best CEC India ever had or likely to have.”
Quraishi also spoke about his stint in the Sports Ministry as Sports Secretary and how he had then said to Suresh Kalmadi that will see you in Tihar.
Recalling his remarks to Kalmadi, the former CEC said that he was appointed as Sports Secretary in 2005 and in 2005 itself preparations for the 2010 commonwealth games had begun. We had started the countdown for the games and we had to ready the infrastructure for the games.
He said that we had a meeting at that time with the Sports Minister Mani Shankar Aiyar and Indian Olympic Association chairman Kalmadi. Kalmadi was also the chairman of the Organising Committee of the Commonwealth games. He took Rs 770 crore from the sports ministry as a grant saying that this amount is revenue neutral and we will return it without interest. But the MoU which we had at that was having a clause that if there is any issue then the government will fulfill it. And thus if the loss of crores was to happen, then we clearly asked for details of the expenditure as it was public money that how you used it.”
Quraishi said that this conversation took place five years before the games, and *In that meeting only I had said to Kalmadi that you all will be enjoying, but we will be sitting in Tihar jail. Then they got shocked with my views and I said then again that if there is no proper expenditure.report all of you will be seen in Tihar as this is public money and there should be no misuse of it.”
“My comments became a reality after some years, as Kalmadi was jailed and he spent time in Tihar,” the former CEC said.
He asserted that the new officers need to read his 500 word memoir, which has wisdom for them to learn and how to work in a competitive and serious job.
He also opened up on refusing a role in PMO and said that I was a Muslim IAS officer and I was given an opportunity to serve in PMO but I refused that because of excessive surveillance on officers serving in the Prime Minister’s Office and that would be more strict in case of a Muslim officer.
“Thus, I had decided to stay away from PMO, Home Ministry or the Defence Ministry,” Quraishi said, adding that I didn’t want to feel caged in these offices and wanted to work freely as I was then posted as Joint Secretary in Youth Affairs and was also having the charge of Director General Nehru Yuva Kendra, thus I decided to go and visit in fields across the country,” he said.
Quraishi also questioned the SIR exercise and said that the entire process being carried out is questionable.
Responding to a question over the debate on SIR exercise and opposition parties slamming the poll panel about the same he said, “The role of EC is questionable. It is the mandate of the commission to purify the rolls. This is what we have been doing for the last 70 years and every year we used to do this.”
Quraishi pointed out that till 2002 we used to Intensive Revision of the rolls and after that when the rolls became computerised, we used to update the rolls with the details of a voter migrating from one place to other.
“But what they said for SIR in Bihar, they said that we are doing it to identify the foreigners. How many foreigners have you identified? Why don’t you have the guts to tell the figure of how many foreigners have been caught? They couldn’t say because they were unable to find it. And in the media I read that only 500 foreigners were identified, of which 150 were Bangladeshis and 350 were from Nepal and married in India, which is yet to be verified,” he said.
Hitting at the Election Commission, the former CEC said, “To catch 150 Bangladeshi, you made eight crore people to run with their documents. For 150 foreigners, you removed lakhs of voters, who were genuine, who should have been included in the voting process were denied their rights. You have polluted the Election process, accountability should be fixed, someone should be held responsible for illegally snatching the voting right of a bonafide citizen of the country.”
To a follow-up question about how several opposition parties are going to court to ask for inclusion of Aadhar besides other documents for their identity, Quraishi said, “The voter rolls that we had for the last 70 years were updated from time to time and had an accuracy of 99 per cent. Even if you have to identify the voters, the BLOs used to go door to door for addition or deletion of any members. And the BLOs also used to check if there were any foreigners in some houses. And if they found any, an investigation was carried out, but to kill a mosquito what is the need to demolish an entire house. This is a bad decision.”
Quraishi also commented on the role of the Returning officer in Madhya Pradesh, where the nomination papers of Congress candidate Meenakshi Natrajan was rejected on the charge of not mentioning a legal proceeding against her in her form.
Quraishi said, “I don’t have personal knowledge of this incident, but what I have read in the media is that she did not mention the legal proceeding against her in her nomination form. However, she later proved that she had received a notice to which she had responded.”
Quraishi also said that a Rao is also a human being, and it is up to him how much pressure he can absorb, if there are some weaknesses that could be used against him.
“And it is reason why, we used to appoint an observer above the RO. The decision of the RO was final, but the observer used to see every process,” he said.
The former CEC also said that Natrajan as per reports has come to court, but it will take time. “But the damage is already done,” he added.
On the elected MLAs and MPs merging or defecting to the other parties after being elected from one party and if there is need to strengthen the anti defection law, Quraishi said, “It is a blot on our democracy, when an elected leader switches to another party by taking money. And saying that he was feeling suffocated or his ideology didn’t match with the party where he was earlier. In my view, the anti defection law has failed. It needs to be strengthened by adding some new rules that whosoever switches to another party has to resign and then he can contest election after a gap of at least six months. And there should be a clause that he should not be made a minister within six months.
