India’s political landscape, already marked by fierce competition and shifting alliances, has been thrown into further turmoil in recent days, with a series of dramatic events highlighting the fragility and vibrancy of the world’s largest democracy. From high-profile defections and allegations of election irregularities to impassioned warnings of unrest and the passing of a legendary reformer, the stage is set for a tumultuous run-up to the critical local and assembly elections scheduled for late 2025.
On September 12, 2025, the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) suffered a significant blow in Maharashtra as Manoj Rane, the state secretary of the BJP Workers’ Front in Mira-Bhayandar, resigned from the party along with hundreds of loyalists. Rane, a well-known supporter of Minister Nitesh Rane, announced his move to Shiv Sena in the presence of party leader Pratap Sarnaik. According to reporting by The Times of India, Rane declared, “We have joined Shiv Sena with a development agenda and will remain active in organizational work under the guidance of Deputy Chief Minister Eknath Shinde, Pratap Sarnaik, and Nilesh Rane.” This mass defection arrives just as the reservation for key posts—District Council President, Vice President, and Panchayat Committee Chairman—was announced, increasing the stakes for all parties ahead of the local self-government elections.
The timing could hardly be more sensitive. With election activities gaining momentum and the grand alliance’s senior leaders insisting they will contest united, the ongoing wave of party-switching has injected fresh unpredictability into the contest. The precise makeup of the Maha Vikas Aghadi remains unclear, with ongoing discussions about a possible alliance between the Shiv Sena (Thackeray faction) and the Maharashtra Navnirman Sena (MNS). Political observers, as reported by Hindustan Times, believe these developments will make the upcoming elections even more gripping for voters and candidates alike.
Meanwhile, the national conversation on democracy and electoral integrity has reached a fever pitch. On the same day as Rane’s defection, former Uttar Pradesh Chief Minister Akhilesh Yadav took the stage in Lucknow to issue a stark warning. Drawing a direct comparison to the violent anti-corruption protests that recently rocked Nepal—leaving at least 51 dead and forcing the evacuation of former Prime Minister Oli—Yadav cautioned that India could face similar unrest if “vote theft” continued unchecked. “If vote theft continues, India will see what Nepal saw,” he said, as quoted by The Indian Express. Yadav accused the BJP of securing recent electoral victories through “vote dacoity” and intimidation, specifically citing alleged irregularities in Ayodhya, Rampur, and other constituencies. He also called out the Election Commission for what he described as biased conduct, adding that India’s first priority should be “peace on its borders and trust in democracy at home.”
Yadav’s remarks have not gone unnoticed by the ruling party, and political analysts predict a sharp response. The memory of Nepal’s recent turmoil, where anti-corruption demonstrations spiraled into deadly violence, hangs heavily over the Indian political discourse. The specter of unrest, combined with persistent allegations of electoral malpractice, is fueling anxiety among both politicians and ordinary citizens as the next round of voting approaches.
In Kerala, the debate over the sanctity of the electoral process has taken on a new urgency. On September 13, 2025, V D Satheesan, Leader of the Opposition in the state’s Legislative Assembly, accused the BJP of attempting to manipulate the democratic process through the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of voter lists. According to Devdiscourse, Satheesan warned that reverting to the 2002 voter list—a central feature of the SIR—could disenfranchise countless long-time voters in Kerala. He vowed that the Congress-led United Democratic Front (UDF) would “fiercely oppose this initiative,” drawing parallels to similar protests that erupted in Bihar. The Election Commission’s signal of an all-India rollout of the SIR by the end of 2025, potentially reshaping voter lists in several states, has only heightened tensions, especially with five assembly elections, including Kerala’s, looming large.
Satheesan’s concerns echo a broader unease about the robustness of India’s democratic institutions at a time of rapid political change. The potential for widespread disenfranchisement, whether intentional or accidental, has become a flashpoint for opposition parties and civil society groups. As the electoral machinery gears up for another massive exercise, the stakes for maintaining public trust in the process have never been higher.
Amid this swirl of political drama and institutional anxiety, India lost one of its most steadfast champions of electoral reform. On September 11, 2025, Jagdeep S Chhokar—educator, activist, and founding member of the Association for Democratic Reforms (ADR)—passed away at the age of 80 after suffering a heart attack. Chhokar’s death, reported by The News Minute and Newslaundry, has sent shock waves across the country’s civil society and academic circles. For over two decades, he was a relentless advocate for transparency and accountability in Indian politics, playing a central role in landmark Supreme Court judgments that forced candidates to disclose their criminal, financial, and educational backgrounds.
Chhokar’s influence extended far beyond the courtroom. He was a key legal strategist behind the 2024 Supreme Court decision that struck down the controversial electoral bond scheme, a move hailed by reformers as a major victory for transparency. In his own words, Chhokar once wrote, “The risk of allowing companies to contribute funds to political parties have been pointed out since as far back as 1975... It is a danger which may grow apace and which may ultimately overwhelm and even throttle democracy in the country.” He also championed the introduction of the ‘None of the Above’ (NOTA) option on electronic voting machines, a reform that the Supreme Court approved in 2013, giving voters the power to reject all candidates if they so wished.
Tributes poured in from across the political and legal spectrum. RJD MP Manoj Kumar Jha said Chhokar had “forced the nation to look into the mirror of its electoral practices and confront the cracks beneath the surface of its democratic edifice.” Lawyer Sanjay Hegde, former election commissioner Ashok Lavasa, and journalist Maneesh Chhibber all echoed the sentiment that India’s democracy is poorer for his loss. Lavasa called the ADR’s work “yeoman service in maintaining high standards of electoral democracy,” while Chhibber remarked that the nation “will be poorer without you.”
As India stands on the threshold of a crucial electoral season, the intertwined stories of political maneuvering, public protest, institutional reform, and personal loss serve as a powerful reminder of democracy’s fragility and resilience. The coming months will reveal whether the system can weather these storms with grace—or whether the cracks, so often spoken of by reformers like Chhokar, will widen further.
