# The BRICS Declaration, Raghav Chadha SIR case, and Tata Sons IPO

An episode of [3 Things](https://invisiblenetwork.ai/podcast/1406730235), 14 Sep 2026, 33 min.

Audio: https://dts.podtrac.com/redirect.mp3/api.spreaker.com/download/episode/75107832/3_things_2026_september_14_v1.mp3

First, we speak to The Indian Express’ Diplomatic Affairs Editor Shubhajit Roy about the New Delhi Declaration adopted at the BRICS Summit, how India bridged divisions over the West Asia war, and what the document reveals about the grouping’s expanding global ambitions. Next, we speak to The Indian Express’ Damini Nath about Raghav Chadha’s removal from Punjab’s draft electoral roll and subsequent reappearance in Delhi, the questions surrounding his registration, and what the case reveals about the ongoing Special Intensive Revision process. (17:40) And in the end, we look at why Tata Sons may be pushed towards a public listing after the RBI rejected its request to surrender its registration, and how differences among major shareholders could shape what may become one of India’s most consequential IPOs. (30:00) Hosted by Ichha Sharma Produced and written by Shashank Bhargava and Ichha Sharma Edited and mixed by Suresh Pawar

## Transcript

[0:00] Speaker 1: In today's episode, we look at the questions raised by
[0:03] Speaker 1: Raghav Chadda's removal and reappearance on electoral rolls and what
[0:08] Speaker 1: his case reveals about the ongoing special intensive revision process.
[0:13] Speaker 1: We also talk about Tata Sands, which may now be
[0:16] Speaker 1: pushed towards a public listing after the RBI rejected its
[0:20] Speaker 1: request to remain an unlisted private entity. But we begin
[0:24] Speaker 1: today with the BRICS summit in New Delhi. where India
[0:28] Speaker 1: has managed to secure a joint declaration after days of
[0:32] Speaker 1: difficult negotiations. Hi, I'm Itchha Sharma and you're listening to
[0:39] Speaker 1: Three Things, the Indian Express news show. The 18th BRICS
[0:48] Speaker 1: summit was held at Bharat Mandapam last week with leaders
[0:52] Speaker 1: and representatives from the expanded grouping discussing trade, terrorism, artificial intelligence,
[0:59] Speaker 1: institutional reform and the future of the global south.
[1:03] Speaker 2: It essentially means that, you know, these countries which are
[1:07] Speaker 2: started out as emerging economies and now have included countries
[1:13] Speaker 2: from different geographies which represent, which are the major economies
[1:18] Speaker 2: from these regions, they have come to some sort of
[1:22] Speaker 2: an agreement on trade. the new world order.
[1:27] Speaker 1: That's the Indian Express's Diplomatic Affairs Editor, Shubhjeet Roy.
[1:31] Speaker 2: Especially after US President Donald Trump came to power in
[1:37] Speaker 2: the last one and a half years, we've seen because
[1:39] Speaker 2: he's imposed these tariffs on India, China, other countries. Everyone
[1:44] Speaker 2: is sort of very uncertain about the global situation. And
[1:49] Speaker 2: the wars in Ukraine and now in West Asia has
[1:54] Speaker 2: further made the geopolitical climate pretty volatile. It is impacting everything.
[2:00] Speaker 2: Our energy prices, our gas prices, which in turn is
[2:04] Speaker 2: fueling inflation and leading to higher commodity prices. So it
[2:10] Speaker 2: has had an economic impact on all our lives and
[2:14] Speaker 2: mostly in developing countries, which are referred to as, you know,
[2:19] Speaker 2: as Global South.
[2:22] Speaker 1: But here, Shubhjeet says, the main challenge for India was diplomatics.
[2:26] Speaker 1: The summit took place against the backdrop of the six-month-long
[2:30] Speaker 1: West Asia war, with Iran and the UAE, both BRICS
[2:34] Speaker 1: members since 2024, sharply divided over the conflict. In fact,
[2:39] Speaker 1: at the BRICS foreign ministers' meeting in May, the members
[2:43] Speaker 1: had failed to agree on a joint statement because of
[2:45] Speaker 1: these differences. This time, however, India was able to bridge
[2:49] Speaker 1: that gap. The New Delhi Declaration expressed deep concern over
[2:54] Speaker 1: tensions in West Asia, called for maximum restraint, protection of
[2:58] Speaker 1: civilians and civilian infrastructure, respect for sovereignty, dialogue and diplomacy,
[3:05] Speaker 1: and the smooth flow of global trade, supply chains, and energy.
[3:09] Speaker 1: The declaration is also significant for what it says and
[3:13] Speaker 1: what it avoids. So how did India manage to get
[3:17] Speaker 1: Iran and the UAE on the same page? And what
[3:20] Speaker 1: does the declaration say about the grouping's priorities? To answer
[3:23] Speaker 1: these questions, we speak with Shubhjeet in this segment. Shubhjeet,
[3:28] Speaker 1: in this 45-page declaration that covers several areas such as trade, terrorism, conflicts,
[3:36] Speaker 1: we keep hearing the phrase Global South constantly at bricks
[3:40] Speaker 1: and also saw Prime Minister Modi's argument that the Global
[3:44] Speaker 1: South is in the front row of crisis but the
[3:48] Speaker 1: back row of decision-making. So, How do we read the
[3:51] Speaker 1: broad significance of this New Delhi Declaration?
[3:54] Speaker 2: So these impact mostly the developing countries which are part
[3:58] Speaker 2: of the Global South. And the Indian side has framed
[4:03] Speaker 2: this particular BRICS grouping as a forum for the Global
[4:07] Speaker 2: South developing countries which are facing the impact and bearing
[4:11] Speaker 2: the brunt of these tariff wars plus the real wars
[4:15] Speaker 2: that are happening now. in the world right now. So,
[4:19] Speaker 2: you know, in that sense, it's a very pivotal moment
[4:23] Speaker 2: in geopolitics in the 21st century. And I think one
[4:27] Speaker 2: of the most crucial moments after the Second World War, where,
[4:30] Speaker 2: you know, these emerging economies and powers have come together,
[4:35] Speaker 2: which are largely non-Western in nature, except for, say, UAE
[4:39] Speaker 2: is almost as close as to the US or the
[4:43] Speaker 2: West as it can be. But most of the countries
[4:47] Speaker 2: feel that these have had an impact. So the BRICS
[4:50] Speaker 2: grouping is trying to figure out and come to a
[4:53] Speaker 2: consensus on major issues of the day from tariffs to
[4:58] Speaker 2: trade to terrorism. And of course, we saw the major
[5:02] Speaker 2: breakthrough was the fact that Iran and UAE came to
[5:06] Speaker 2: a consensus on how they view the war in West Asia.
[5:11] Speaker 2: So that I think was the biggest diplomatic breakthrough in
[5:15] Speaker 2: this particular statement in the New Delhi summit.
[5:20] Speaker 1: Shubhjeet, as you mentioned that the West Asia paragraph can
[5:23] Speaker 1: be considered to be the hardest part of the negotiation.
[5:27] Speaker 1: In fact, Iran and the UAE had failed to agree
[5:29] Speaker 1: at the BRICS foreign ministers meeting in May as well.
[5:32] Speaker 1: So what finally brought the two nations together?
[5:36] Speaker 2: So I think we have to understand that, firstly, it's
[5:40] Speaker 2: been six months since the West Asia war flared up
[5:43] Speaker 2: with US and Iran exchanging strikes. And there has been
[5:49] Speaker 2: now a realization by Iran that, and UAE, which find
[5:55] Speaker 2: themselves in opposing sides. You know, UAE, because UAE hosts
[5:59] Speaker 2: a lot of American military bases, American facilities, American military personnel.
[6:05] Speaker 2: So it has been targeted by Iran. And so UAE
[6:09] Speaker 2: and Iran found themselves on opposing sides. And they came
[6:14] Speaker 2: to the realization that the world was, and the developing
[6:19] Speaker 2: countries especially, were extremely, I mean, upset about the impact
[6:24] Speaker 2: of the war, which was affecting their livelihoods, their economy.
[6:29] Speaker 2: And the UAE Emiratis and Iranians, they were brought together
[6:34] Speaker 2: on the same table by the Indians, Russians, Chinese, Egyptians,
[6:39] Speaker 2: and the Brazilians, especially, to come to a conclusion that,
[6:44] Speaker 2: you know, it is a consensus document. in the breaks
[6:48] Speaker 2: would only empower them to go ahead and try and
[6:53] Speaker 2: work towards a resolution to the war. Now, whether it
[6:57] Speaker 2: will lead to an end to the war, we don't
[6:59] Speaker 2: know because firstly, the war will end only when the
[7:03] Speaker 2: two principal parties, which is US and Iran, they agree
[7:06] Speaker 2: to end the war. So UAE in that sense is
[7:08] Speaker 2: a side player. But the point I'm trying to make
[7:13] Speaker 2: is that Both sides, both warring sides, have come to
[7:17] Speaker 2: a formulation where they have accepted the impact on civilians,
[7:21] Speaker 2: impact on the passage of energy supply through the state
[7:26] Speaker 2: of Hormuz. They have also agreed that dialogue and diplomacy
[7:31] Speaker 2: can only lead to the end of the war. So
[7:33] Speaker 2: these broad principles... which were the two sides had not
[7:39] Speaker 2: agreed before and felt that they were not, you know,
[7:42] Speaker 2: they didn't sign up to it when the BRICS foreign
[7:45] Speaker 2: ministers met in May this year. In, I think, the
[7:48] Speaker 2: last three, four months, that calculus has changed.
[7:53] Speaker 1: And so, Subhash, would it be safe to say that
[7:55] Speaker 1: Delhi was actually mediating between Iran and the UAE? Like,
[7:59] Speaker 1: how much credit does India deserve for this?
[8:02] Speaker 2: Absolutely. India did this mediation when it came to framing
[8:07] Speaker 2: the joint declaration. It had done successfully in 2023 between
[8:14] Speaker 2: Russia and the Western countries in the G20 summit declaration
[8:19] Speaker 2: as well, when it was held in September 2023 in
[8:22] Speaker 2: New Delhi, when President Biden had come to India. But
[8:27] Speaker 2: what we have to also see that just because they
[8:30] Speaker 2: agreed on the language didn't mean an end to the
[8:32] Speaker 2: Russia-Ukraine war. But it gives some foundational principles to work on.
[8:38] Speaker 2: And later, we have seen peace efforts have taken place
[8:42] Speaker 2: between the Americans and the Russians to end the war.
[8:45] Speaker 2: It has not led to anywhere in a real sense,
[8:49] Speaker 2: but it gives some kind of window of opportunity and
[8:52] Speaker 2: some kind of hope to people that it might lead to,
[8:56] Speaker 2: now that they have narrowed the gap in understanding the
[8:59] Speaker 2: implication of the war, maybe, maybe it might lead to
[9:03] Speaker 2: an opening where the talks can happen and there's an
[9:07] Speaker 2: end to this war is in sight.
[9:10] Speaker 1: Right, and I think one of the most striking omissions
[9:13] Speaker 1: is Ukraine. So talk about how should we read Brick's
[9:17] Speaker 1: choosing to say nothing at all about a war that
[9:21] Speaker 1: still remains one of the biggest geopolitical crises in the
[9:24] Speaker 1: world today.
[9:25] Speaker 3: You're right.
[9:25] Speaker 2: You know, Ukraine has not been mentioned. But I also
[9:28] Speaker 2: have to caution that, you know, we need context because
[9:32] Speaker 2: in the last joint declaration as well, after the previous
[9:37] Speaker 2: BRICS summit in 2025, which took place in Rio, it
[9:40] Speaker 2: was a very anodyne mention of Ukraine that had happened.
[9:44] Speaker 2: And that was to be expected because at that point
[9:47] Speaker 2: of time, I mean, all along Russia has been a
[9:50] Speaker 2: original BRICS member country and it has always resisted mention
[9:55] Speaker 2: of anything on Ukraine. And last time, the anodyne paragraph
[9:59] Speaker 2: just read analogy. read it out to you from the
[10:02] Speaker 2: Rio 2025 declaration which said that we recall our national
[10:05] Speaker 2: positions concerning the conflict in Ukraine as expressed in the
[10:09] Speaker 2: appropriate fora including the UN Security Council and the UN
[10:13] Speaker 2: General Assembly. So It essentially said that we are recalling
[10:17] Speaker 2: our national positions and about the conflict and nothing more.
[10:21] Speaker 2: There was no condemnation of Russian invasion of Ukraine or
[10:26] Speaker 2: the loss of lives or the attack on civilians and
[10:30] Speaker 2: the casualties and the food security and energy security disruption
[10:35] Speaker 2: that had taken place because of the war. So this time,
[10:38] Speaker 2: even this paragraph, Ukraine is not mentioned at all. So
[10:43] Speaker 2: in that sense, it is a give to Russia, where
[10:47] Speaker 2: it has got its way to even a mention of
[10:51] Speaker 2: Ukraine to be dropped from the joint declaration. It just
[10:55] Speaker 2: shows Russia has managed to have its way in the
[11:01] Speaker 2: BRICS grouping more than last year. Also, because you have
[11:05] Speaker 2: to understand that today, Russia is one of the biggest
[11:10] Speaker 2: energy suppliers in the market to the world where energy
[11:14] Speaker 2: supply has been disrupted because of the war in West Asia.
[11:18] Speaker 2: So it has gained leverage over the Global South countries
[11:22] Speaker 2: and the BRICS countries in the last six months or so.
[11:25] Speaker 1: And interestingly, the declaration is clearly pushing back against US
[11:30] Speaker 1: tariffs and sanctions, but never actually names Trump or the
[11:35] Speaker 1: United States. So why use this kind of diplomatic code,
[11:40] Speaker 1: if I may, rather than direct criticism?
[11:43] Speaker 2: Well, I think we have to understand that Although no
[11:46] Speaker 2: BRICS member country likes the trade wars and tariff wars
[11:50] Speaker 2: that have been imposed by President Trump, but everyone has
[11:56] Speaker 2: a stake with the United States. And we know how
[11:59] Speaker 2: unpredictable Trump can be when it comes to a hostile
[12:03] Speaker 2: statement or hostile declaration. He's always threatened, you know, BRICS
[12:08] Speaker 2: with tariffs. So he's made his opposition to the BRICS
[12:13] Speaker 2: grouping and his animus and hostility towards the BRICS grouping
[12:17] Speaker 2: pretty public and pretty clear. So I think nobody wants
[12:21] Speaker 2: to beard the lion. And they avoided naming him directly
[12:27] Speaker 2: while criticizing the principle of these unilateral tariffs and economic sanctions,
[12:35] Speaker 2: unilateral coercive measures. That's how they sort of slammed the
[12:39] Speaker 2: American tariffs imposed on some of these BRICS countries.
[12:44] Speaker 1: And Subhijit, so when BRICS condemns unilateral sanctions or any
[12:49] Speaker 1: Western-dominated institution... Is it becoming anti-Western bloc or is that
[12:54] Speaker 1: too simplistic a lens?
[12:56] Speaker 2: Well, you know, the Western groupings and Western analysts have
[13:01] Speaker 2: tried to frame it as an anti-Western grouping. And I
[13:04] Speaker 2: think at some level, China, Russia, at some level, they
[13:08] Speaker 2: have also tried to push this sort of narrative as
[13:12] Speaker 2: an anti-Western alternative to the Western grouping, which is primarily
[13:17] Speaker 2: which is G7, essentially, because Russia used to be part
[13:20] Speaker 2: of it as G8 and then it got expelled. from
[13:25] Speaker 2: the grouping. And so they have tried to frame it
[13:28] Speaker 2: as anti-Western. But I think India is one of the
[13:32] Speaker 2: moderating factors where India has always mentioned and maintained that
[13:36] Speaker 2: it's a non-Western grouping. And now I think even the
[13:40] Speaker 2: Chinese and the Russians, because of the relationship and the
[13:43] Speaker 2: high stakes relationship that they have with the Western countries,
[13:48] Speaker 2: it doesn't see it as an anti-Western grouping. And if anything,
[13:53] Speaker 2: UAE is the last country to call it anti-Western because
[13:58] Speaker 2: to be part of an anti-Western group, it itself identifies itself,
[14:02] Speaker 2: I think, more as a part of the Western bloc
[14:06] Speaker 2: than an anti-Western bloc. So I think that's a framing
[14:09] Speaker 2: that is a deeply flawed framing. But that's how analysts
[14:16] Speaker 2: in the West have tried to frame it as by because,
[14:20] Speaker 2: you know, obviously, when you have countries like China, Russia,
[14:25] Speaker 2: Iran on one platform, this is perceived as an anti-Western
[14:30] Speaker 2: grouping because they most commonly give out statements slamming the
[14:34] Speaker 2: Western world order. Right.
[14:37] Speaker 1: And another significant line is how India has once again
[14:41] Speaker 1: got explicit BRICS condemnation of the Pahalgam terror attack. So
[14:46] Speaker 1: how significant is it for Delhi to preserve that kind
[14:50] Speaker 1: of language in a group that includes China?
[14:53] Speaker 2: Yeah, I mean, I think on Pahalgaon, the joint statement,
[14:57] Speaker 2: joint declaration last year had mentioned condemnation of the Pahalgaon
[15:01] Speaker 2: terror attack as well when it happened in Rio 2025.
[15:05] Speaker 2: And this time it has been sort of almost copy
[15:09] Speaker 2: paste of the last formulation. So that's not new. But
[15:14] Speaker 2: you're right, because China is traditionally seen as supporting Pakistan.
[15:19] Speaker 2: But I think China also and other countries also differentiate
[15:23] Speaker 2: between what happened in Palgaon and what happened in Obsindore.
[15:29] Speaker 2: So on Pahalgaon, obviously, China also had condemned the terror attack.
[15:33] Speaker 2: But it has a different approach when it comes to Obsindoor,
[15:37] Speaker 2: where it is now pretty publicly well known that how
[15:41] Speaker 2: it colluded with Pakistan during the Obsindoor. So I think
[15:47] Speaker 2: this anti-terror stand by China on Pahalgaon And the anti-terror
[15:55] Speaker 2: framing in the BRICS grouping is quite well established because,
[15:58] Speaker 2: you know, on principle, all the countries are on the
[16:02] Speaker 2: same page that terrorism must be condemned in all its
[16:06] Speaker 2: forms and manifestations.
[16:08] Speaker 1: And lastly, Shubhjeet, from a macro view lens, BRICS is,
[16:11] Speaker 1: of course, much larger than the original five-member grouping now.
[16:15] Speaker 1: So how do we place it in global diplomacy? Like,
[16:19] Speaker 1: does expansion make it more powerful now?
[16:22] Speaker 2: So there have been sort of two schools of thought.
[16:26] Speaker 2: One believes that, yes, the expansion is, gives it, you know,
[16:32] Speaker 2: has more countries under its umbrella. So wider its tent,
[16:36] Speaker 2: more its heft it becomes. So, you know, in terms
[16:39] Speaker 2: of GDP, in terms of population, everything, you know, it
[16:43] Speaker 2: increases the heft. The other school of thought is that
[16:47] Speaker 2: making it bigger doesn't necessarily mean better because it also
[16:52] Speaker 2: brings in the internal and differences and that impacts the grouping,
[16:58] Speaker 2: as we saw in case of UAE and Iran through
[17:01] Speaker 2: the year when they couldn't agree on the paragraph on
[17:05] Speaker 2: the war. I think that has changed with this summit,
[17:08] Speaker 2: with this declaration. But I think we have to see,
[17:12] Speaker 2: we have to give it some time before we can say,
[17:16] Speaker 2: that a larger BRICS grouping with 11 members from the
[17:20] Speaker 2: original four and then it became five, it yields to
[17:24] Speaker 2: any benefit. We have to give it some time, say five,
[17:26] Speaker 2: 10 year timeframe before we can say whether it has
[17:30] Speaker 2: become too unwieldy or it actually benefits the people and
[17:35] Speaker 2: increases the heft of the grouping.
[17:42] Speaker 1: And next. we talk about the questions that the Raghav
[17:45] Speaker 1: Chadha case has raised about the ongoing SIR process. Over
[17:49] Speaker 1: the past few weeks, BJP Rajya Sabha MP Raghav Chadha
[17:54] Speaker 1: has been in the news after the Indian Express reported
[17:56] Speaker 1: that he was among the 13.37 crore electors whose names
[18:02] Speaker 1: were deleted from the draft electoral rolls being prepared as
[18:06] Speaker 1: part of the Election Commission's Special Intensive Revision or SIR. Now,
[18:11] Speaker 1: Chadda was supposed to be on the Punjab draft electoral roll. Instead,
[18:15] Speaker 1: his name appeared on the list of electors marked as absent, shifted,
[18:20] Speaker 1: dead or duplicate and deleted from the draft roll published
[18:24] Speaker 1: on the 31st of August. But just days after this
[18:27] Speaker 1: came to light, Chadda was back on the electoral rolls.
[18:30] Speaker 1: but this time in Delhi rather than Punjab. His case
[18:34] Speaker 1: has raised several questions about how the SIR process is
[18:38] Speaker 1: being carried out, as well as allegations of whether some
[18:41] Speaker 1: people may have received special treatment. To discuss the case
[18:46] Speaker 1: and what it tells us about the SIR process, my
[18:49] Speaker 1: colleague Shashank Bhargav speaks to the Indian Express's Damini Nath,
[18:52] Speaker 1: who has been reporting on the issue.
[18:55] Speaker 3: Damani, when it was first revealed that Raghav Chadha's name
[19:00] Speaker 3: has been deleted from the draft electoral roll, can you
[19:03] Speaker 3: talk about how did Chadha react to this information? And also,
[19:06] Speaker 3: what was the reaction of the Ahmadni party in Punjab?
[19:10] Speaker 4: Raghav Chadha's name was amongst lakhs of names, you know,
[19:14] Speaker 4: that were deleted in the Punjab draft electoral roll on
[19:17] Speaker 4: August 13th. He was labelled as permanently shifted on the
[19:22] Speaker 4: deletion list. On 2nd of September, when the Indian Express
[19:26] Speaker 4: reached out to him for the story that we were doing,
[19:29] Speaker 4: He gave us a statement saying that he had been
[19:33] Speaker 4: deleted because of a political vendetta that the Aam Aadmi
[19:35] Speaker 4: Party had against him. Because as we know, he was
[19:38] Speaker 4: earlier with the Aam Aadmi Party and in April this year,
[19:41] Speaker 4: he joined the BJP. His contention was that he had
[19:44] Speaker 4: been targeted for deletion by the booth level officers, the
[19:48] Speaker 4: EROs and the officials involved. in Punjab, who happen to
[19:51] Speaker 4: be Punjab government employees. Though, of course, they are under
[19:54] Speaker 4: the Election Commission's control for the process of the SIR.
[19:57] Speaker 4: Raghav's statement made it clear that he would explore all
[20:00] Speaker 4: legal options available to him, which implies that he would
[20:04] Speaker 4: fill a Form 6 to get back on the role. He, however,
[20:07] Speaker 4: did not mention that he would do so in Punjab
[20:10] Speaker 4: or in any other state. The Aam Aadmi Party said
[20:13] Speaker 4: in a statement on the same day that they had
[20:15] Speaker 4: nothing to do with this entire process as the SIR
[20:18] Speaker 4: has been conducted by the Election Commission of India and
[20:20] Speaker 4: it is the ECI that controls the entire process.
[20:24] Speaker 3: Now, his name was deleted in the Punjab draft roll,
[20:27] Speaker 3: but then a few days later, he was back on
[20:30] Speaker 3: the electoral rolls, but this time in Delhi. Now, when
[20:34] Speaker 3: you came to know about this, what kind of questions
[20:38] Speaker 3: popped up in your mind as someone who has been
[20:40] Speaker 3: reporting on this process from the beginning?
[20:43] Speaker 4: Raghav Chadha's case is actually quite interesting because, you know,
[20:46] Speaker 4: the last one year of the SIR across the country,
[20:49] Speaker 4: we haven't come across a case like this where somebody
[20:52] Speaker 4: has been deleted in one state in the draft roll
[20:56] Speaker 4: and has managed to get himself enrolled in another state
[21:00] Speaker 4: even before the final rolls of both the states have
[21:03] Speaker 4: been published. In the case of Raghav Chadha, the Delhi
[21:07] Speaker 4: chief electoral officer has given a statement saying explaining that
[21:10] Speaker 4: he had filled his form to enroll again in Delhi
[21:14] Speaker 4: on 26th of August. And on the 2nd of September,
[21:18] Speaker 4: he was enrolled. Now, this happened in between the draft
[21:22] Speaker 4: and final stages in Delhi. The draft roll of Delhi
[21:25] Speaker 4: came out on 31st of August and Raghav Chadha was
[21:28] Speaker 4: not on that roll. There was no way he could
[21:30] Speaker 4: have been on that roll because he was not an
[21:32] Speaker 4: elector in Delhi when the SIR started in Delhi. Since
[21:35] Speaker 4: he filled his form on the 26th of August, his
[21:38] Speaker 4: name started reflecting as an elector on the 2nd of September.
[21:43] Speaker 4: This is what the Delhi CEO said. However, when the
[21:45] Speaker 4: Indian Express checked his electoral details on the ECI's portal
[21:50] Speaker 4: on the 2nd of September, we could not find him anywhere.
[21:53] Speaker 4: He had been deleted in Punjab and there was no
[21:55] Speaker 4: record of him being an elector in Delhi on the
[21:58] Speaker 4: 2nd of September. Since then, the CEO has said in
[22:01] Speaker 4: a statement that Raghav Chadha was added back to the
[22:04] Speaker 4: roles in Delhi on the 2nd of September.
[22:06] Speaker 5: So, you know, that's the status that we know of.
[22:09] Speaker 3: And can you tell us how could this have happened?
[22:12] Speaker 3: Like he was supposed to be part of the Punjab
[22:15] Speaker 3: draft list. So how could he have changed his state
[22:18] Speaker 3: so fast? And how does one even do this?
[22:21] Speaker 4: So the only way to shift your electoral registration from
[22:25] Speaker 4: one booth to another or one state to another is
[22:28] Speaker 4: by filling a Form 8, which is the Election Commission's
[22:31] Speaker 4: statutory form for corrections, shifting, generation of new epic numbers,
[22:36] Speaker 4: any change basically to the electoral roll. In the case
[22:39] Speaker 4: of Raghav Chaddha, we don't have any information from the
[22:43] Speaker 4: Delhi CEO whether he filled a Form 6 or a
[22:46] Speaker 4: Form 8.
[22:47] Speaker 5: A Form 6 is a new electoral registration.
[22:50] Speaker 4: We understand that in Delhi, he would have been considered
[22:53] Speaker 4: a new elector because his name had been deleted in
[22:56] Speaker 4: the draft in Punjab. So ideally, he should have filled
[23:00] Speaker 4: a Form 6 and not a Form 8, which is
[23:03] Speaker 4: for shifting. But we do not have this clarity yet
[23:07] Speaker 4: from the CEO office.
[23:08] Speaker 2: And how rare is this case?
[23:10] Speaker 3: Because this happened fairly quickly, you know, us finding out
[23:13] Speaker 3: that his name was deleted from the draft role in Punjab,
[23:16] Speaker 3: and then learning that he's back on the role, but
[23:19] Speaker 3: in Delhi. How does it compare to other cases that
[23:23] Speaker 3: we've seen?
[23:25] Speaker 4: I haven't come across a case like this so far
[23:27] Speaker 4: in any of the states that we have covered, you know,
[23:29] Speaker 4: starting with Bihar where the SIR was first rolled out
[23:33] Speaker 4: and then in Bengal as well. This entire case has
[23:36] Speaker 4: actually raised quite a few questions because the ECI's SIR
[23:39] Speaker 4: guidelines are very clear. BLOs can accept the Form 6
[23:43] Speaker 4: or can collect the Form 6 for new enrolment during the.
[23:47] Speaker 5: Draft stage, but they don't process it.
[23:49] Speaker 4: The draft role only includes names of those who were
[23:52] Speaker 4: already on the roles prior to the SIR. It does
[23:55] Speaker 4: not include any new names. So since Raghav Chadda's form
[23:59] Speaker 4: was filled during the draft stage, we don't know whether
[24:02] Speaker 4: it was processed during this draft stage or it was
[24:05] Speaker 4: processed initially. just after the publication of the draft. So
[24:08] Speaker 4: in Delhi, the draft was published on 31st of August
[24:11] Speaker 4: and on the 2nd of September, Raghav Chadha was on
[24:14] Speaker 4: the rolls. We don't know whether the processing happened in
[24:16] Speaker 4: just a span of two days or it was done
[24:19] Speaker 4: from 26th of August when he filled the form. If
[24:22] Speaker 4: it happened prior to the publication of the draft roll,
[24:25] Speaker 4: that would be unusual because what we have seen in
[24:28] Speaker 4: other states and even in Delhi is Those who have
[24:31] Speaker 4: filled Form 6, say for themselves, if they've just turned
[24:34] Speaker 4: 18 or if they've had their name deleted earlier and
[24:36] Speaker 4: want to get back on their roles, their Form 6
[24:39] Speaker 4: have not actually been processed in the draft stage at all.
[24:42] Speaker 4: The booth level officers have been telling those applicants to
[24:46] Speaker 4: wait till after the SIL is over.
[24:48] Speaker 5: So that they can process their Form 6.
[24:51] Speaker 4: So this does show that there was a lot of
[24:54] Speaker 4: speed with which Raghav Chadha's application was processed. However, the
[24:58] Speaker 4: Delhi CEO has not clarified yet how this process actually unfolded.
[25:03] Speaker 3: And so what do you think this reveals about the
[25:06] Speaker 3: SIR process? And what are the questions that still remain
[25:10] Speaker 3: unanswered for you?
[25:12] Speaker 5: Since the SIR is basically, you know, being.
[25:15] Speaker 4: implemented through the ECI's ECINet portal, this does raise questions about,
[25:21] Speaker 4: you know, the centralization of the entire process because the
[25:25] Speaker 4: law is very clear. It is the electoral registration officer
[25:29] Speaker 4: who is usually an SDM or somebody of that rank
[25:32] Speaker 4: who is responsible for maintaining and updating an electoral role.
[25:36] Speaker 4: The entire process in the law is completely decentralized. But
[25:40] Speaker 4: Through the SIR, the process is centralized in that it
[25:44] Speaker 4: is being carried through the ECI centralized portal. So this
[25:49] Speaker 4: raises questions about centralization of these decisions because an ERO
[25:54] Speaker 4: in Delhi's Rajinder Nagar who has processed Raghav Chadha's form
[26:00] Speaker 4: in unusually short period of time, it is at odds
[26:04] Speaker 4: with what we have seen in other cases. So we
[26:07] Speaker 4: don't know whether this has been done at the level
[26:10] Speaker 4: of the ERO or at the level of the district
[26:14] Speaker 4: or of the state.
[26:15] Speaker 5: These are questions that remain.
[26:17] Speaker 4: And in fact, this is something which the Aam Aadmi
[26:20] Speaker 4: Party has also raised, where they have alleged that Raghav
[26:24] Speaker 4: Chadha was given special treatment because he is an MP
[26:28] Speaker 4: of the ruling party.
[26:30] Speaker 3: And, you know, we were talking about the Form 6
[26:31] Speaker 3: earlier that needs to be filled if you need to
[26:35] Speaker 3: be included in the electoral rolls for new electoral registration, basically.
[26:41] Speaker 3: And now details of all Form 6s appear in the
[26:46] Speaker 3: Form 9. Does Raghav Chadha's Form 6 application appear in
[26:52] Speaker 3: Form 9? No.
[26:53] Speaker 4: So the Form 9, as we know, is basically a
[26:57] Speaker 4: list of all the Form 6 received by an ERO.
[27:00] Speaker 4: So these are all the people who have filled a
[27:02] Speaker 4: form to become a new voter. And the EC's guidelines,
[27:06] Speaker 4: manuals and even the SIR rules make it clear that
[27:09] Speaker 4: during the process of claims and objections... which is the
[27:12] Speaker 4: one month period after the draft roll is published. Any
[27:16] Speaker 4: new additions or deletions to the draft require disclosure by
[27:20] Speaker 4: the ERO and the chief electoral officer on notice boards
[27:24] Speaker 4: at their offices and on their website. Basically, this is
[27:27] Speaker 4: for members of the public and political parties to be
[27:30] Speaker 4: aware of who wants to be added to the rolls,
[27:33] Speaker 4: who wants to be deleted. And if they want to
[27:35] Speaker 4: make any objections to these changes, this is an opportunity
[27:38] Speaker 4: they get. So this Form 9 for Rajinder Nagar Assembly
[27:42] Speaker 4: constituency in Delhi, where Raghav Chaddha has been enrolled, from
[27:45] Speaker 4: the 1st of September till the 7th of September that
[27:48] Speaker 4: we checked, did not have Raghav Chadha's name on it.
[27:52] Speaker 4: There were 205 new form 6 applications in that assembly constituency,
[27:57] Speaker 4: but Raghav Chadha's name was not among those.
[27:59] Speaker 5: This could be because.
[28:01] Speaker 4: Raghav Chadha filled his form before the claims and objections period.
[28:05] Speaker 4: He filled his form on 26th of August before the
[28:08] Speaker 4: claims and objections period started on the 1st of September.
[28:11] Speaker 4: So that could be a reason why his name is
[28:13] Speaker 4: not there. But again, we don't have clarity on this point.
[28:17] Speaker 3: And Damini, can you tell us what happens if your
[28:19] Speaker 3: name doesn't make it to the draft list and eventually
[28:23] Speaker 3: is not there even in the final list as well?
[28:27] Speaker 4: If your name is deleted from the draft roll, you
[28:30] Speaker 4: still have a one month. window to get back on
[28:34] Speaker 4: the rolls in time for the publication of the final
[28:36] Speaker 4: roll in your state. You have to fill a Form 6, basically,
[28:40] Speaker 4: which is the form for a new voter. And the
[28:43] Speaker 4: process of that is similar to any Form 6 that
[28:46] Speaker 4: you would fill. You have to give your identity proof,
[28:48] Speaker 4: your age proof, your residence proof. And If you still
[28:52] Speaker 4: live in that same address or the same assembly constituency,
[28:55] Speaker 4: you should be added back to the role in that
[28:57] Speaker 4: same constituency or both. If your name is deleted in
[29:01] Speaker 4: the final role, as per the Representation of the People Act,
[29:04] Speaker 4: you have two appeals.
[29:06] Speaker 5: That you can avail of.
[29:07] Speaker 4: The first appeal is at the level of the district
[29:11] Speaker 4: election officer.
[29:11] Speaker 5: Or the DM.
[29:12] Speaker 4: And if the DM also does not add you back
[29:15] Speaker 4: to the role, you have a second appeal at the
[29:17] Speaker 4: level of the chief electoral officer of the state. And
[29:20] Speaker 4: the entire SIA process is only to prepare the electoral
[29:24] Speaker 4: rolls and the election commission's mandate only covers the electoral rolls.
[29:28] Speaker 4: But what we have seen in states where the SIR
[29:31] Speaker 4: has been completed is that state governments have used the
[29:34] Speaker 4: SIR roles as one of the filters to weed out
[29:37] Speaker 4: what they call ineligible beneficiaries of welfare schemes or of
[29:42] Speaker 4: ration schemes. What we've seen in Bihar and in Bengal,
[29:48] Speaker 4: it shows that the SIR electoral roles can be used
[29:51] Speaker 4: by state governments as a database to weed out what
[29:56] Speaker 4: they call ineligible beneficiaries.
[30:04] Speaker 1: And in the end, we talk about Tata Sons, the
[30:07] Speaker 1: principal holding company of the Tata Group, which may now
[30:11] Speaker 1: have to head towards an initial public offering after the
[30:14] Speaker 1: Reserve Bank of India rejected its request to remain an
[30:18] Speaker 1: unlisted private entity. A few weeks ago, Tata Sons had
[30:22] Speaker 1: asked the RBI to allow it to surrender its registration
[30:26] Speaker 1: and be treated as an unregistered core investment company. The
[30:30] Speaker 1: central bank has refused that request and directed the company
[30:34] Speaker 1: to comply fully with the rules applicable to an upper-layer
[30:38] Speaker 1: non-banking finance company. As reported by the Indian Express's George Matthew,
[30:43] Speaker 1: that classification matters because NBFCs placed in the upper-layer face
[30:49] Speaker 1: significantly tighter regulation due to their size, interconnectedness, and potential
[30:55] Speaker 1: systemic importance. For Tata Sons, compliance with those rules effectively
[31:00] Speaker 1: means moving towards a public listing that could bring greater
[31:05] Speaker 1: regulatory scrutiny over its balance sheet, investment structures, risk management,
[31:10] Speaker 1: corporate governance, and disclosures. The issue has also exposed divisions
[31:15] Speaker 1: within the Tata ecosystem. Tata Trusts owns around 66% of
[31:20] Speaker 1: Tata Sons. Its chairman, Noel Tata, along with some former
[31:24] Speaker 1: Tata Sons directors, has favoured keeping the company private. But trustees,
[31:29] Speaker 1: Venu Shrivasanan and Vijay Singh, have supported a listing. The
[31:33] Speaker 1: Shapurji Pallonji Group, which owns an 18.3% stake in Tata Sons,
[31:39] Speaker 1: also supports the move. a public listing would potentially allow
[31:43] Speaker 1: the group to monetize part of that holding and raise funds.
[31:46] Speaker 1: And there is another regulatory wrinkle here. Even though Tata
[31:50] Speaker 1: Sons repaid its debt in 2024 and no longer directly
[31:53] Speaker 1: accesses public funds, The RBI still considers it indirectly connected
[31:59] Speaker 1: to public funds because listed Tata companies, including Tata Steel,
[32:03] Speaker 1: Tata Chemicals and Tata Power, hold equity in it. So,
[32:07] Speaker 1: this is not simply a question of whether Tata Sons
[32:10] Speaker 1: wants to list. The RBI's decision suggests that because of
[32:14] Speaker 1: Tata Sons' scale and its position at the centre of
[32:17] Speaker 1: one of India's largest corporate groups, The regulator believes it
[32:21] Speaker 1: should operate under the stricter transparency and governance standards applied
[32:27] Speaker 1: to systemically important financial entities. If the listing goes ahead,
[32:32] Speaker 1: it could become one of the most consequential IPOs in
[32:36] Speaker 1: Indian corporate history. You were listening to Three Things by
[32:42] Speaker 1: The Indian Express. Today's show was edited and mixed by
[32:45] Speaker 1: Suresh Bavar and produced by Shashank Bhargav and me, Itchha Sharma.
[32:49] Speaker 1: If you like the show, do subscribe to us wherever
[32:52] Speaker 1: you get your podcast. You can also recommend it to
[32:54] Speaker 1: someone you think may like it, with a friend or
[32:57] Speaker 1: in your family.
[32:58] Speaker 5: This is the best way for people to get to
[33:00] Speaker 5: know about us.
[33:01] Speaker 1: You can also tweet us at Express Podcast or write
[33:04] Speaker 1: to us at podcast at indianexpress.com.

Shows are listed from Apple Podcasts' charts and directory, and Podcast Index where it is used. Every show and episode belongs to its publisher and plays from the publisher's own feed; this site hosts none of them.