Private company in Bengaluru found selling bulk voter data to candidates in Karnataka Assembly polls
Cyber Crime Branch officials file FIR against company
New Delhi: At the threshold of the Assembly elections in the state, a private firm in Bengaluru has been found selling voter data in bulk.
While the owners are yet to be traced, the company has been found advertising on its website openly that it has ‘sensitive information’ related to voters, including their mobile phone numbers and WhatsApp numbers, reports The News Minute.
The potential clients are given login access by the company and can purchase the voters’ information and other services from the website, for as low a price as Rs 25,000.
Investigation on the domain details of the website revealed that it was registered in Delhi in April this year, but all other details on the website had been redacted by the company.
The Election Commission has been investigating if the company could have been used to bribe the voters to provide such information, by crediting funds into the voters’ accounts through the Unified Payments Interface (UPI).
The matter of the data sale by the company came to light when Raju, an independent candidate, informed the EC after he was called on phone and offered voter data for a price. Raju spoke to Srinivas, the officer in-charge of enforcement of the Model Code of Conduct, about the matter. The officer, in turn, roped in the police, who registered a complaint on April 24.
An FIR has also been registered by the Cyber Crime Branch (Southeast Division) officers in Bengaluru against the private company in this regard.
On logging in to the website of the private company, it was found that the dashboard declared that the website contained data of up to 6.5 lakh voters, including 3.45 lakh male, 2.93 lakh female and 5,600 other voters. It is yet to be confirmed about the total data that the company has and if the data pertains to specific constituencies, says The News Minute.
Sources in the EC have expressed concern that the format of the data being sold is similar to what is stored on Eronet, the government portal with the EC data on voters and which only election officials can access.
This is the second voter scam discovered in Karnataka in the last six months. In November 2022, ‘Chilume’, a private company, was found to have collected personal data from lakhs of Bengaluru voters. The company staff had posted it as officials of the Bruhat Bengaluru Mahanagara Paliker (BBMP).
Let the Truth be known. If you read VB and like VB, please be a VB Supporter and Help us deliver the Truth to one and all.
Single higher education regulator bill tabled in LS; Oppn flags ‘centralisation,' JPC likely
New Delhi: A bill to set up a 13-member body to regulate institutions of higher education was introduced in the Lok Sabha on Monday.
Union Education Minister Dharmendra Pradhan introduced the Viksit Bharat Shiksha Adhishthan Bill, which seeks to establish an overarching higher education commission along with three councils for regulation, accreditation, and ensuring academic standards for universities and higher education institutions in India.
Meanwhile, the move drew strong opposition, with members warning that it could weaken institutional autonomy and result in excessive centralisation of higher education in India.
The Viksit Bharat Shiksha Adhishthan Bill, 2025, earlier known as the Higher Education Council of India (HECI) Bill, has been introduced in line with the National Education Policy (NEP) 2020.
The proposed legislation seeks to merge three existing regulatory bodies, the University Grants Commission (UGC), the All India Council for Technical Education (AICTE), and the National Council for Teacher Education (NCTE), into a single unified body called the Viksit Bharat Shiksha Adhishthan.
At present, the UGC regulates non-technical higher education institutions, the AICTE oversees technical education, and the NCTE governs teacher education in India.
Under the proposed framework, the new commission will function through three separate councils responsible for regulation, accreditation, and the maintenance of academic standards across universities and higher education institutions in the country.
According to the Bill, the present challenges faced by higher educational institutions due to the multiplicity of regulators having non-harmonised regulatory approval protocols will be done away with.
The higher education commission, which will be headed by a chairperson appointed by the President of India, will cover all central universities and colleges under it, institutes of national importance functioning under the administrative purview of the Ministry of Education, including IITs, NITs, IISc, IISERs, IIMs, and IIITs.
At present, IITs and IIMs are not regulated by the University Grants Commission (UGC).
Government to refer bill to JPC; Oppn slams it
The government has expressed its willingness to refer it to a joint committee after several members of the Lok Sabha expressed strong opposition to the Bill, stating that they were not given time to study its provisions.
Responding to the opposition, Parliamentary Affairs Minister Kiren Rijiju said the government intends to refer the Bill to a Joint Parliamentary Committee (JPC) for detailed examination.
Congress Lok Sabha MP Manish Tewari warned that the Bill could result in “excessive centralisation” of higher education. He argued that the proposed law violates the constitutional division of legislative powers between the Union and the states.
According to him, the Bill goes beyond setting academic standards and intrudes into areas such as administration, affiliation, and the establishment and closure of university campuses. These matters, he said, fall under Entry 25 of the Concurrent List and Entry 32 of the State List, which cover the incorporation and regulation of state universities.
Tewari further stated that the Bill suffers from “excessive delegation of legislative power” to the proposed commission. He pointed out that crucial aspects such as accreditation frameworks, degree-granting powers, penalties, institutional autonomy, and even the supersession of institutions are left to be decided through rules, regulations, and executive directions. He argued that this amounts to a violation of established constitutional principles governing delegated legislation.
Under the Bill, the regulatory council will have the power to impose heavy penalties on higher education institutions for violating provisions of the Act or related rules. Penalties range from ₹10 lakh to ₹75 lakh for repeated violations, while establishing an institution without approval from the commission or the state government could attract a fine of up to ₹2 crore.
Concerns were also raised by members from southern states over the Hindi nomenclature of the Bill. N.K. Premachandran, an MP from the Revolutionary Socialist Party representing Kollam in Kerala, said even the name of the Bill was difficult to pronounce.
He pointed out that under Article 348 of the Constitution, the text of any Bill introduced in Parliament must be in English unless Parliament decides otherwise.
DMK MP T.M. Selvaganapathy also criticised the government for naming laws and schemes only in Hindi. He said the Constitution clearly mandates that the nomenclature of a Bill should be in English so that citizens across the country can understand its intent.
Congress MP S. Jothimani from Tamil Nadu’s Karur constituency described the Bill as another attempt to impose Hindi and termed it “an attack on federalism.”
_vb_22.jpeg)
