Why Tamil Nadu attacks pro-prohibition activists even as it prepares to implement the policy

Please read this for what I think of prohibition in Tamil Nadu.

It must be confusing to be a policeman in Tamil Nadu these days. One day, you are booking people for sedition because of what they said at pro-prohibition meetings. The next, you are providing protection for politicians who promise the implementation of prohibition, going even to the extent of saying that it would be the first order of the new government.

On Thursday, police in 11 districts across the state used violence to break up protests in front of 19 TASMAC outlets. Not of the that-is-enough-break-it-up-and-go-home variety; three activists of grassroots group Makkal Adhikaram, which demands the immediate closure of all the outlets of state-owned liquor distributor Tasmac, allege torture in the lock-up of the Maduravoyal police station. They say they were picked up before their protest meeting could begin, kept in their undergarments and beaten with lathis on the soles.

To go ahead and state the obvious: all this, for demanding something that could be state policy in less than 20 days. If Tamil Nadu ends up adopting a Bihar-like Tasmac law, the same policemen will be rushing to close Tasmac outlets and chasing away patrons from attached bars.

This is what happens when the state becomes a profit-seeking entity even as it intervenes in social policy. Tamil Nadu’s liquor policy - whose face is the Tasmac - was ostensibly drafted to end the inflow of illicit liquor. However, over time, revenue considerations have taken centre-stage and liquor sales now contribute over 30 percent of the state’s revenue even as deficit is estimated at Rs. 9,154 crore.

This means that the state has begun acting like a peddler, rather than a regulation-minded public health intervenor, of alcohol. The attitude makes itself evident in the way it establishes Tasmac outlets near residential areas and schools. Tamil Nadu has continued to ban toddy, denying farmers access to the most economically valuable product of the abundant palmyra palm, the state tree. Low prices and the omnipresence of Tasmac outlets alone does not explain the low consumption of country and illicit liquor in the state, borne out by NSSO data. Revenue-driven, the state machinery reacts aggressively to anything that falls outside its monopoly, meaning only Lakshadweep residents consume more country liquor, per capita.

The police are the muscle to this operation. Those who complain against Tasmac outlets in their locality regularly talk of police indifference; when they merely assemble in front of an outlet demanding its closure - as people of Nappalayam and Maduravoyal realised on Thursday, violence is rained down on them. After all, if the Tasmac is the state, so are the police.

The duality evident in the promise of violence to protestors as it anticipates the closure of Tasmacs in the near future is a sign of how reluctant the state is when it comes to implementing prohibition. If anything, it just go on to prove a certain Rajinikanth-like quality of the state: the state is right till it decides it isn’t.

What were the voters thinking?! A rant.

I felt I had to say this out loud too many times during this election campaign. I held back for the sake of projecting objectivity. Now that the last vote has been counted, here's a rant that has been building up inside me:

I really wish some of those who won in Jharkhand yesterday had lost. I also wish some others won.

Those seven with alleged links to various left wing extremist organisations should not have won: Anosh Ekka (Kolebira), Ganesh Ganjhu (Simariya), Paulus Surin (Torpa), Nirmala Devi (Barkagaon), Prakash Ram (Latehar), Jagarnath Mahato (Dumri) and Jai Prakash Bhai Patel (Mandu).

I have written about them extensively elsewhere, but four worry me particularly. I am saddened that Anosh Ekka, already facing corruption charges and now in jail for murder, could win without even being present to campaign. I am angry at Babulal Marandi for propping up Ganesh Ganjhu, brother of TSPC supremo Brajesh Ganjhu. I am worried for the people of Torpa: Paulus Surin won with the lowest margin in the state because the PLFI opposed him throughout. Now that he has won, expect Surin to fight back. By extension, I am angry that Hemant Soren continued to support him. The Congress gave a ticket to Nirmala Devi, wife of former minister Yogendra Saw, in jail for allegedly starting two criminal gangs.

Dulu Mahto and Sanjeev Singh, who allegedly control the coal business in Dhanbad, won. There is an M-word to describe them. The alternative to Sanjeev Singh was of course Niraj Singh, his cousin who also has interests in coal, but at least he is better educated.

The people of Bhawanathpur voted for Bhanu Pratap Shahi, a former minister in the Madhu Kora government - like Anosh Ekka - who is facing multiple cases of corruption and disproportionate assets.

I have no idea why Sita Soren deserved to win from Jama. She was absconding for over a year in an assault case originating from the 2012 Rajya Sabha horse trading scam. Investigators say she was the one responsible for distributing money to legislators.

Nalin Soren has consistently failed to deliver in Shikaripara; he was also absconding for months in relation to a corruption case. This is the fifth consecutive time that he has won - he had no reason doing so.

Gita Kora will always be known as former chief minister Madhu Kora's wife, but people of Jaganathpur told me she was a better leader and legislator than Kora. Frankly, I am ambiguous about her win.

I am also happy that a few people did not win. The Jharkhand Party candidates in Torpa and Simdega - the latter was Anosh Ekka's wife - did not succeed. The PLFI was supporting them; their win would have meant a critical mass for the organisation.

I am happy Mahadev Ravinath Pahan did not win from Tamar. He is a cousin of CPI-Maoist leader Kundan Pahan and a win would have meant a fresh round of violence in the region.

I am grateful the voters of Ghatsila did not back Pradeep Balmuchu. He had nominated his 26-year-old daughter from the seat after ensuring the Congress's alliance with JMM ended. His selfishness was a major reason why the Congress went from 14 seats in 2009 to six now.

I am still searching for credible explanations as to why the BJP nominated Seema Sharma from Hatia at all. It was an insult to its cadres and voters - the party thought it could bring on an unknown face an win merely by riding the Modi wave.

I am happy that three individuals won - Pradip Yadav from Poreyahat, Arup Chatterjee from Nirsa and Raj Kumar Yadav from Dhanwar. Pradip Yadav was one of the most active legislators in the outgoing legislative assembly, raising a number of vital issues. I believe the outlooks of Arup Chatterjee and Rajkumar Yadav - from Left parties - will be vital during debates in the House.

Lois Marandi's win from Dumka is also important. It teaches the JMM to not be careless about its constituencies. Marandi is highly educated; her identity as a adivasi Christian makes her the only representative from a religious minority community within the BJP's 38 legislators.

I wish three individuals won. Arjun Munda would have been an important adivasi voice in the BJP; without him, the state unit of the party is vulnerable to a takeover from Delhi.

Sudesh Mahto's loss from Silli is a major setback. He had undertaken a large number of infrastructural and social projects in the region. I considered him to be the legislator who had done the most work during the last tenure. There are many arguments against him - allegations of corruption, use of alcohol and money to lure youngsters - but I believe Mahto should have been given one more term. His cadre strength in the region was one reason why the Maoists avoided Silli; it could change now. The eventual winner may give Kerala's Freakerz a run for their money, though.

I also think the CPI-ML's Vinod Singh deserved to win. He was a good legislator - always asking the right questions during assembly debates and taking principled stand on issues. The few interactions I have had with him told me he is a good man and a capable leader, too. He would have been an asset to the House.

The politically correct thing to say is that the voters decided whom to send to the assembly in their collective wisdom. If you have managed to read this far, you would know that I think that is bullshit.

Scramble for wins polarise Jharkhand further

This was published, edited, here.

Though it more than doubled its seat tally when compared to the 2009 assembly elections - 18 to 37 - the BJP has ended up not being satisfied with its performance in Jharkhand.

The BJP's final tally of 37 is unprecedented: the highest number of seats any party in the state held was when the BJP had the 32 it took away from the Bihar assembly on creation of Jharkhand in November, 2000. This time, the BJP has managed to have a footprint across the state - unlike the JMM, confined mostly to the East and South with no presence in Palamu - thus claiming a certain moral right to rule Jharkhand.

However, the NDA's numbers are lower than what major exit polls predicted: from 43-51 for the BJP alone to 61 in all with the BJP's alliance with the AJSU Party and LJP. At the end of the day, the BJP-AJSU alliance has just one seat more than what is required for a majority in the 81-member House.

So, where did the BJP's calculations go wrong? It looks like the party underestimated the JMM's understanding of Jharkhand. To put it more bluntly, the BJP did not understand the adivasis as the JMM does.

Of the 28 ST-reserved seats in the state, the BJP has won 11. This only an increase of two over the number it won in 2009. On the other hand, the JMM has managed to win 13 this time; it had only won 10 in 2009. The JMM's total number of seats went up by only one from 2009, to 19 now.

What this essentially means is that the JMM is more of an adivasi party now. The JMM lost three seats in the Santhal Pargana region but made sure it won the same number of ST-reserved seats there as it had won in 2009. It made significant inroads into its former stronghold of Kolhan - the heart of the statehood movement - by winning two ST seats more than in 2009.

The JMM's return to Kolhan is what seems to have damaged the BJP the most - it lost two potential CM candidates in the process in Arjun Munda and Chaibasa candidate J.B. Tubid, former state Home Secretary. The JMM surrendered its Ghatsila seat, but reclaimed Manoharpur, Majhgaon and Chakradharpur from the BJP - all ST seats.

The BJP may have increased its tally in the Santhal Pargana from two to seven, but only two of its seats are ST-reserved. This is still a major achievement - but it also means that the state as a whole seems to have been divided along the adivasi/ non-adivasi polarities: the Congress has failed to win a single ST seat despite actively wooing the adivasis. The result is that the number of ST seats won by anyone other than JMM or BJP has dropped from nine to four this election.

The BJP's major gains seems to have come from the weakening of the Congress (14 to six), RJD (five to zero) and the JVM-P (11 to 8). The BJP was counting on the JVM to do worse; Marandi has hurt the BJP by clawing back from the abyss. However, the overall weakening of the JVM would have done the BJP a world of good - the former had the highest vote share in 2009, at 28.4 per cent. The BJP now has 31.3 per cent; the JMM, 20.5 per cent.

No Independent has won the election this time, but the BJP lost five seats to regional partie; in a sign of what could have been, the BJP's candidates came second in 28 constituencies. With the help of some smart caste arthmetic, the BSP managed to win Hussainabad. At Jaganathpur, the party could not overcome Madhu Kora's popularity combined with his wife's image as an accessible politician. The party could not win in Kolebira despite Jharkhand Party leader Anosh Ekka is in jail on murder charges. At Bhawanathpur, Bhanu Pratap Shahi had canvassed for votes claiming he would go over to the BJP if he won.

The BJP seems to have got its strategy of Muslim polarisation only partially right. Despite facing a tough contest, it managed to retain Rajmahal, which has a significant number of Muslim voters. At Pakur, Madhupur and Jamtara, the BJP hoped the presence of multiple Muslim candidates or Muslim-favoured parties would help its cause, but it was successful only in Madhupur. At Torpa, which has a large number of Christian voters, the BJP hoped its Hindu candidate would win; the JMM retained the seat.

What this election has exposed is the cracks within Jharkhand - as the BJP aggressively pushed for a majority, it brought together the caste Hindus in its support. However, that left a space for the JMM to bring on identity politics and walk away with the adivasi votes. It was not easy for the JMM either - it lost Tundi, a stronghold which was once the base of Shibu Soren's activism against moneylenders.

The BJP's first move was to spread the rumour that it would consider a non-tribal CM. The JMM and Hemant Soren made use of the opportunity, whipped up sentiments about the BJP's alleged plans to amend the state's tenancy laws and portrayed the BJP as a party of outsiders. The results seems to have been a general adivasi aversion to the BJP. This BJP-JMM duality could also be the future of Jharkhand, especially if Babulal Marandi ends up supporting a BJP-led government.

This is what the BJP did in Jharkhand

This was published, edited, here.

For more on the topic, please read this and this.

A senior newspaper editor based out of Delhi once asked this reporter during the Jharkhand election campaign: "The BJP has not managed to form a government in the state, right?" Therein lay the victory of the BJP's advertisement brute force, sometimes passed off as an election campaign.

The format of the five-phased campaign to capture the state's 81 seats progressed in the format of a typical episode of the US television show Person of Interest: protagonists trying to ascertain if a certain individual is a victim or a perpetrator.

The BJP was quick to claim the victim's spot: it cast the JMM as the perpetrator and said that the Sorens were responsible for the under-development of Jharkhand. The party argued that the only difference between Jharkhand and the two other states formed alongside was that Chhattisgarh and Uttarakhand have "stable" governments. It then claimed that the other two states have seen impressive growth and that the BJP is the only party capable of providing Jharkhand with a stable government.

In all this, the party was counting on short public memory: of the nine governments formed in the state since its formation in November 2000, four had BJP chief ministers.

Probably keeping in mind a largely rural, illiterate demographic, the BJP kept its message simple throughout: that all of Jharkhand's problems will be solved by electing a stable government. At almost no point during the campaign did the BJP bothered itself with the how of things. This attitude was exhibited in the linear nature of its video advertisements - the narrator asks what Jharkhand's biggest problem is, someone who looks like a voter responds by naming an issue, the narrator asks what the solution is and the voter says, "Bhaajpa ka button dabi, kamal khili," in the Nagpuri dialect.

To its credit, the BJP had latched on to a genuine grievance of Jharkhandis: the state and its people have often been laughed at for its tumbling governments. By owning the issue, the BJP made sure that anyone who even expressed the desire to see stable governance would be seen as supporting it. In fact, as the campaign evolved, voters came to express a certain sympathy for the BJP: "They should be given one chance," was an expression one often heard from villagers.

The promise of stable government made, the BJP needed a credible face to tell it to the people. Prime Minister Narendra Modi therefore came to occupy that space; mostly because it would bring back memories of failed governments past, the BJP was loathe to project anyone from the old guard as chief minister. Despite the state unit of the party taking the effort to publish a 56-page manifesto, PM Modi set the agenda. Apart from the issue of instability, two concerns occupied his speeches - Sorens and adivasis. The party did not actively reach out to any other social groupings: the BJP did not have a Muslim candidate, the dalits of the state largely consider themselves Hindus.

The verbal duel between the PM and CM got very personal at times: responding to Modi's comments about his family's influence, CM Soren once said he was sorry the PM did not have children. As for the adivasis, Modi was selective - while speaking in dalit-majority Chandwa in Latehar district in the first phase, Modi never mentioned the adivasis. By the time the campaign reached the other end of the state in the fifth phase, Modi was actively wooing the adivasis in Dumka.

This in turn led to two fresh conflicts. BJP said it formed Jharkhand; JMM coined a slogan to counter it: "Hum ne banaya, hum sawarenge." The other was in response to attacks by Rahul Gandhi, with Modi saying the Congress had forgotten adivasis and that it needed Atal Bihari Vajpayee's first government to form a Ministry of Tribal Welfare.

The BJP could afford to not talk about micro issues with this magic wand approach of its leader. Left wing extremism was one: apart from a few perfunctory remarks, Modi offered nothing new in his speeches. In that respect, he was in line with the party's manifesto, which had only four lines on the topic. The PM almost never mentioned the former BJP governments in the state, lest it refresh voters' memories.

With the help of the regional media, the BJP had moved seamlessly from its initial target of a single-party-government to the slogan of ending instability after its Delhi leadership forced through an alliance with the AJSU Party. The party managed to stay on message till the campaign approached the last phase of polling in the Santhal Pargana. The JMM and Hemant Soren managed to turn the tables briefly there, portraying the BJP - "a party of outsiders" - as the perpetrator.

At that point, the BJP reached for its fail-safe in Prime Minister Narendra Modi. He delivered, addressing massive rallies in Dumka and Barhait constituencies, where Hemant Soren contested from. The BJP knew the PM's focus on him will lionise CM Soren, but that did not bother its campaign managers. Their target was never really the Sorens, after all: it was a win, at any cost.

Modi goes to Hemant's constituencies as BJP unleashes Santhal Pargana atttack

This was published, edited, here. 

Prime Minister Narendra Modi on Monday took on Jharkhand Chief Minister head-on today, addressing rallies in both constituencies where Hemant Soren is contesting from.

It was a tacit acknowledgement that Hemant Soren, a first-time MLA, has grown big enough to warrant the BJP's undivided attention. The BJP needs to improve its tally of two seats in the 16 constituencies that go the boiths as part of the last phase on December 20. For this, it needs to weaken the JMM, which holds 10 seats of the 16.

Modi addressed rallies within Dumka and Barhait constituencies. Speaking at the Dumka airport in a speech that lasted about 35 minutes, Modi pulled a few punches against Hemant Soren, using the baap-bete reference only once in the JMM stronghold which is currently the CM's constituency. At Barhait, where Hemant is going up against JMM defector Hemlal Murmu, the PM was more combative: "This baap-bete will not let anyone get ahead." This has become a strategy of Modi: attack an individual anywhere but his stronghold; the PM probably understands unrestrained attacks could have a backlash among people of the area.

The strategy of the PM going to the two constituencies could backfire if Hemant manages to win both. "We are willing to take that chance. The important thing is to show now that we are not afraid," said a member of the BJP's campaign team at the state headquarters.

At Dumka, Modi said in passing that, ".... none of you have got anything, but the baap-bete's coffers have been filled." He seemed to be cautious of treading a fine line when criticising the Sorens: "If a child commits an error, will his mother reward him with a laddoo? Won't the mother punish to correct the child?" Modi then went on to suggest that the voters should punish the Sorens. "Even if you like them, you should vote for the BJP to punish them.... Punish them now so that they will be of use to you five years later."

Modi campaigned for nine candidates, including one of the LJP, at Dumka. Upon arrival at 12 PM, when Dumka candidate Louis Marandi bowed in welcome after gifting him a traditional Santhali shawl, Modi too bowed. Later, the PM began his speech with a greeting in Santhali language even as he performed the Johar, clutching the right elbow and touching the forehead with a clenched right first. The district administration had planned for a crowd of 50,000; over a lakh turned up according to a source with access to the SPG's assessment.

Even though adivasis in the crowd were far outnumbered, Modi made it a point to talk about them extensively. "I am willing to give my life for the welfare of my poor adivasis," the PM said. The BJP is seeking to bring together the adivasis into its vote base of Santhal Pargana's "outsiders" in order to breach the JMM stronghold. ".... They (Opposition) tell adivasis that Modi government will take away your land. I tell you, there is no one in this country who can take away the rights of the adivasis," Modi said.

Modi said that adivasis in various states had repeatedly elected BJP governments. "BJP governments have given away the maximum land titles," he said. However, Modi's proclamations on adivasis received lukewarm response from the audience. On the other hand, when the PM mentioned jobs and unemployment for all, the crowd cheered as one.

Modi said adivasis had not asked for government bungalows, official vehicles and gold. Instead, they want only water, education and medicines. "Should the government not give all this? If they could not do all this, what were they doing?" Modi asked, signalling a digging action with his hands. "Loot! They have looted with both hands. You have blessed me to end this loot," Modi said, adding that he was a chowkidar in Delhi.

Insider role in Chaibasa jailbreak?

This was published, edited, here.

Police suspect the involvement of a guard in the Chaibasa jailbreak by Maoists on Tuesday evening, when CCTV cameras, mobile jammers and warning sirens at the facility did not work.

Senior officers are yet to believe the jail guards' claim that the prisoners threw chili powder on them during the incident. None of the 15 who escaped have been apprehended; police officers admit in private they are not hopeful of catching most of them.

Sentries on the rooftop of the district jail in the heart of the town, about half a kilometre from the Superintendent of Police's office, had opened fire when a total of 20 prisoners attempted to flee at about 4.15 PM on Tuesday. They had been part of a group of 55 being returned from the district court after hearings. Two senior commanders of the CPI-Maoist's PLGA were killed while 15 others escaped; three others were involved in a scuffle with jail guards and were subdued after suffering minor injuries.

West Singhbhum district's Superintendent of Police Narendra Kumar Singh said Mochirai Munda, an ex-serviceman employed as a jail guard on a contractual basis, has been named in the First Information Report. "He has been named along with those who escaped as he was responsible for opening both the gates. He should have closed the main gate before opening the second. We will interrogate him to find out if it was intentional," said SP Singh.

The jail van, with 55 undertrials inside, reversed into the premises through the main gate. Munda, who held the keys to the main as well as a smaller entrance through which prisoners had to go on foot, left the main gate wide open. Thirty five prisoners had passed through the second gate when Ramvilas Tanti and Tipa Das, both platoon commanders and the seniormost among the 20 left, began attempting to snatch the guards' weapons.

Guards have since told their superiors that the prisoners threw chilli powder on their faces, but SP Singh said he had found no evidence to support their claim yet. As the prisoners ran out, police personnel who had escorted the van in two bullet-proof vehicles and an escort vehicle from the local police station fired in the air. After this, two sentries on top of the jail's roof shot at Das and Tanti, who were left behind as they had been trying to make away with the weapons. Both bodies were found between the main and second gates.

"We have given show-cause notices to 15 personnel, which includes the 10 who were in the three escort vehicles outside the jail. We want to find out why they were not able to apprehend the fleeing suspects," said SP Singh. Police have not yet come across any evidence that the prisoners had help on the outside. "I think they picked yesterday because the Mangala haat (weekly bazaar) sits on Tuesdays," said the SP. Once the fleeing men were among the crowd, they became one with it.

However, suspicion of help from inside lingers. "We are trying to find out how the siren that was sound in case of a jailbreak did not sound. We have to find out for how long the CCTV directed at the main gate and jammers have been inactive," said SP Singh. As the 20 outside made their escape attempt, the 35 who had gone through the second gate tried to get out, which raises doubts that there were a larger conspiracy afoot. The 35 could not get out as guards closed the gate immediately.

There will be a Magisterial inquiry into the shooting. The SP and the Deputy Commissioner of Chaibasa will prepare a joint report on the incident. Inspector General (Prisons) Shailendra Bhushan, who was at the Chaibasa jail on Wednesday, has been asked by Home Secretary N.N. Pandey to inquire into the incident. "I am currently talking to various individuals to get an understanding of what happened. No new information has surfaced yet," said Bhushan over phone.

For SP Singh, appointed this January, the loss is particularly difficult to digest. "We had made 45 Naxal arrests and topping the state in terms of arrests. It was so difficult to arrest them - Tipa Das was arrested in August from Cuttack when he went to be treated for an ailment - and now, all that is lost," said Singh.

For similar reasons, police officers admit it would be difficult to arrest most of those who escaped. "Johnson Ganjhu, who was an area commander and is the seniormost of those who escaped, was boycotted by his party. It will take him at least six months to regain their trust. That is a useful window for us," said an officer who did not want to be quoted for this story. As for the rest, police expect them to leave the district. "They will go to Delhi, Punjab and work as labourers. Almost all of them were low-level operatives like couriers and were charged with relatively minor offences. Unless someone surrenders, they will face even bigger sentences for this jailbreak," the officer continued, "These are guys who make a mistake only once."

The incident has also brought to light the need for video conferencing facilities inside the jail. There have been multiple cases of prisoners escaping or attempting to during court appearances. "The Chaibasa jail does not have it currently. Ideally, we should be able to present prisoners through VC after presenting them before a court only once," said the officer.

Chaibasa jail has witnessed a jailbreak by Maoists before, in 2011. All three who escaped that day remain at large - Sandeep has since grown to become one of the seniormost leaders of the party in the state.

Marandi becomes TSPC's Trojan Horse at state assembly gates

This was published, edited, here.

Babulal Marandi's JVM-P, depleted by the flight of eight of its 11 MLAs, is performing a dangerous experiment in Chatra district's Simariya constituency by promoting a candidate who is using the opportunity to further the cause of a banned organisation he has links to.

Jharkhand Vikas Morcha (Prajatantrik) has nominated Ganesh Ganjhu to the Simariya seat; Ganesh is the elder brother of Brajesh Ganjhu, the supremo of the banned left wing extremist organisation Tritiya Sammelan Prastuti Committee. 

The TSPC has thrown its weight behind Ganesh, especially in the Lawalong block where its main leaders live: no other party managed to open campaign offices there. Reports from the ground indicate TSPC, whose supremo Brajesh is widely expected to eventually become a politician, has used its clout to support JVM-P candidates in the adjoining Chatra and Latehar constituencies, which voted on November 25.

Former CM Babulal Marandi knows the dangers of extremism well: his son Anup Marandi was killed by alleged Maoists in 2007. Yet, cornered after most his legislators defected to the BJP, Marandi - who has always stood for a clean public image - seems to have prioritised survival over everything else. His party had also given its Tamar ticket to Mahadev Ravinath Pahan, related to Kundan Pahan, the state's second-most-wanted Maoist leader.

By giving the TSPC the opportunity to win three seats, Marandi risks being beholden to the Ganjhu brothers if they succeed. It is also a measure of the TSPC’s growth over the past five years that it now aspires to win three seats.

The JMM is also not far behind: among others, it has given tickets to wives of former Maoists in Tamar and Chatra; its Simariya candidate Rajkumari Devi is the wife of banned organisation Jharkhand Prastuti Committee's supremo Guddu Ganjhu.

"Babulal Marandi is a good leader, but he has spoilt his party's name by giving ticket to Ganesh here," said Binod Bihari Paswan, the Communist Party of India's Simariya candidate, who was fired upon by unknown assailants on Saturday night. "I am sure it was the TPC. Before I filed my nomination, two boys on a bike had threatened me by saying only Ganesh Ganjhu will contest from here," said Binod, whom the bullets missed and who now moves around with seven bodyguards.

The BJP has also complained to the Election Commission, alleging it's workers have been beaten up. "Ganesh Ganjhu has not let my supporters campaign in Lawalong. The administration is refusing to take our complaints seriously," said BJP's candidate Sujeet Bharati. This newspaper has reported that the TSPC was formed by the state police and continues to enjoy its patronage.

In the 2010 elections to local bodies, the TSPC had ensured that most of Lawalong would be represented by its nominees, elected unopposed. Brajesh Ganjhu his himself the deputy panchayat president of Lawalong. Sources in Lawalong told this newspaper that Ganesh's campaign was on Monday - the eve of the campaign - distributing blankets among voters. These blankets were presumably supplied by the state government to panchayats to be given to people for the season.

Earlier this year, chief minister Hemant Soren had told the state assembly that former DGP V.D. Ram had formed the TSPC; Ram is currently a Lok Sabha member of the BJP - there were allegations that the TSPC had supported his attempt to be Palamu MP. The TSPC had supported the BJP's LS campaign in Chatra too - as Ganesh was then a BJP member. He had moved over from the JMM, which had given him a ticket in 2009: he came second.

This assembly election, Chatra's outgoing MLA and RJD candidate Janardhan Paswan had alleged the TSPC supported JVM-P candidate Satyanand Bhokta by holding Jan Adalats. This newspaper had reported from Latehar on how a TSPC squad threatened villagers, demanding votes for JVM-P's Prakash Ram. In contrast, the JVM-P's LS election candidate Neelam Devi - a Prakash Ram choice - was reportedly supported by the CPI-Maoist.