In January 2026 something strange went on during the Kalyan-Dombivli Municipal Corporation elections. It was not the people who won the elections that surprised everyone. Elections can be very surprising. The fact that people could not vote in 20 wards. No people were waiting to vote at the polling booths. No one was using the EVMs; there was no NOTA option for people to choose, no discussions about the elections at the tea shops, and people did not seem to care about the Kalyan-Dombivli Municipal Corporation elections at all. The winners of the Kalyan-Dombivli Municipal Corporation elections were already decided before the voting even started. Things looked good on paper. In reality, it felt like something big was missing. It was like something had been taken away without anyone noticing. There were 122 seats in the KDMC. For 20 of these seats, only one person was running. This means that the person automatically became a corporator. The ruling Mahayuti alliance got all 20 of these seats. The BJP got 14 seats, and the Shiv Sena, led by Eknath Shinde, got 6 seats. This made up 16 percent of the entire corporation, and it was all decided without any citizen even using an Electronic Voting Machine. In a country where people really love voting, this whole thing felt like a festival, but the gates were closed before anyone even got there. The Electronic Voting Machine was not used by any citizen. That is really surprising. The entire corporation was affected by this decision. It is all very strange.
This situation happened because the other parties did not just decide not to take part. It is because the people who wanted to run from Shiv Sena (UBT), MNS, NCP (Ajit Pawar faction), NCP (Sharad Pawar faction), and Congress had problems with their papers. Their nomination forms were rejected, or they decided to withdraw before January 1.
When the final list was ready, there was no one to compete with in those areas. There was one person from each party left. The law says that when there is one person running, that person automatically wins the election. The election rules say this about the Shiv Sena (UBT) and the other parties, like MNS, NCP (Ajit Pawar faction), NCP (Sharad Pawar faction), and Congress. The laws do not think about how people feel or the harm that is done to the trust that people have in the government. Some of the times when people won without anyone opposing them were really surprising. Harshal More, who is the son of MLA Rajesh More, won the election for Ward 28A. Nobody ran against him. In Ward 24, Ramesh Mhatre, Vishwanath Rane, and Vrushali Joshi all got to be in office, and nobody tried to stop them. On the side of the BJP party, Asavari Navare and Rekha Chaudhary were some of the official winners in the areas of Dombivli and Kalyan. For the parties, these wins were things. The parties saw these as victories for the BJP and the other parties. The election results showed that Harshal More and the others were the winners. When it comes to democracy, people have a lot of questions. Democracy is supposed to be good for everyone. It does not always work that way. Democracy is a system where people get to choose their leaders. Sometimes this system does not give us the results we want. For democracy to really work, we need to make sure everyone is treated fairly. This is the problem with democracy. Democracy is not perfect. That is why people have so many questions about it.
The ruling alliance says this shows how much people like them and that they are doing a job. The Chief Minister says it is a sign that people are happy with the way the government is working and the programs they have started. The Chief Minister also says it shows that people like the welfare programs. BJP leaders point out that some people won without any opposition in Maharashtra
The people who are against the ruling alliance do not see it this way. They think this is not a win because they say the result was not fair. Shiv Sena (UBT) leader Sanjay Raut said something. He said that some candidates were given a lot of money, up to five crore rupees, to withdraw from the election. Sanjay Raut also said that the money was taken to the homes of the candidates or they were forced to withdraw in ways that were not official. The ruling alliance and the Shiv Sena (UBT) have views on the election result. The allegations about the process are really making people question whether it was fair. Other leaders, like Abu Azmi, said that their candidates were getting a lot of pressure and were even offered money. Some people were scared, while others talked about getting "requests that cannot be refused. As time went on, the candidates started to pull out of the process. The allegations are raising doubts about the whole thing, and it is making people wonder if the political process was genuine.
There were some allegations about the administration being unfair. It seems that the people in charge of the election rejected the papers of opposition candidates for mistakes, but they did not do the same for the Mahayuti candidates when they made similar mistakes. If this is true, it means the election was not fair from the start. The main issue here is about the ordinary people who vote. What happens to the person who wants to choose none of the above, which is called NOTA? What about the person who does not like the candidate who is left? What about the citizens who just want to make sure their vote is counted? The ordinary voter is really who this is all about; the Mahayuti candidates and the opposition candidates are not the focus; it is the ordinary voter. People were never asked what they wanted because there was no voting, no machine to vote with, and no options to pick from. The only thing they got was a notice that said "elected without anyone else running. This is the problem. Democracy is not about who wins. It is about letting people make a choice, even if they do not want to choose anyone. The people should have a say in what happens; that is what democracy is about. The issue is, with the fact that the people did not get to choose, that is where the controversy lies with the democracy and the election process with the democracy and the election.
This is why a social activist named Shrinivas Ghanekar and several political groups decided to go to court. They believed that people should still have the chance to vote even if there is one candidate, so they can choose NOTA. Social activist Shrinivas Ghanekar and these groups said that voting is a way for people to express themselves in a democracy; it is not something you do because you have to. They looked at what the Supreme Court has said about this. The Aam Aadmi Party thought that if NOTA gets votes, then the only candidate election should not count and should be done again. Think about what this means. Candidates would not be able to win. The State Election Commission seems unsure about this situation. They said they will not officially announce these 20 winners until the Municipal Commissioner looks into the withdrawals. The State Election Commission wants to know if people were forced or paid to withdraw from the election. When organizations, like the State Election Commission, are unsure, it usually means something is wrong. The candidates would still have to deal with the public even if they are the ones running for the position. The State Election Commission is waiting for the Municipal Commissioner to provide information.
This situation is already pretty messy. Then there is even more to the story. The 27 Villages Struggle Committee wants its municipality, so they decided not to take part in the election in some areas and did not put up any candidates. They were not trying to help the people in charge. That is what ended up happening. In those areas, it was easy for people to win without any competition because the 27 Villages Struggle Committee did not have any candidates. The 27 Villages Struggle Committee and its actions made it easy for some people to win. Sometimes things just get crazy in politics. That can be a good thing for some people. The 27 Villages Struggle Committee and its decision to boycott the election made a difference.
This is a troubling thing: most of what happened is actually allowed by law. The law says it is okay if someone wins without anyone opposing them. The rules say that people can withdraw from elections. The system says that forms can be accepted or rejected. But democracy is not just about what's legal; it is about what is right. It is an agreement between the government and the people. When twenty areas are decided without anyone voting, something goes wrong. It is not the rules of the country that are broken; it is the trust that people have. People start to wonder: Does my vote really matter? Is everything already decided before we even get to vote? Democracy is about the people having a say. When that does not happen, people lose faith. The democratic system is not about the law; it is about democracy itself.
The law allows people to win without opposition. The rules allow people to withdraw from elections. The system allows forms to be accepted or rejected. Democracy is broken when the people do not get to vote, and that is what happened in twenty wards. Democracy itself is what breaks, not the rules of the country. The trust that people have in the democratic system is a big problem. Is the EVM just for show?
What happened in KDMC is not just about KDMC. It is about something bigger. If they can do this in KDMC, they can do it in cities and states, too. This means that elections might not be events anymore. They might just become something that the government takes care of. Democracy does not disappear all of a sudden. It disappears slowly over time. The Mahayuti alliance sees these 20 seats as a win for them. For the people who're against them, these 20 seats are a big problem. They are worried about what this means for them and for KDMC. But for the average citizen, they signify something more alarming: a reminder that even the right to vote can be taken away silently. The KDMC situation urges India to face a serious and uncomfortable question: Is democracy only about winning, or is it about being chosen? If this loophole isn’t addressed, one day we may wake up to realize that elections are a facade.
. . .
REFERENCES: