SRINAGAR: The ruling National Conference (NC) on Tuesday accused its rival, the opposition PDP, of cross-voting during the Rajya Sabha elections held in October last year, in which J&K BJP president Sat Sharma unexpectedly won despite the party lacking the required numbers.
On October 24, 2025, elections were held for four vacant Rajya Sabha seats in Jammu and Kashmir. Although the NC had the backing of 59 members, it secured only three seats and unexpectedly lost one to the BJP.
“Cross-voters in the J&K Rajya Sabha have been exposed. Now the question is what prompted PDP MLAs to vote for BJP candidate Sat Sharma, despite having publicly promised to support the NC,” NC spokesperson Imran Nabi Dar posted on X.
Imran was the NC candidate for the fourth Rajya Sabha seat in J&K. Despite the NC having the numbers, following assurances of support from the PDP and independents, he lost to BJP’s Sat Sharma.
Sharma secured 32 votes, four more than his party’s strength of 28, while three votes were declared invalid. Imran received 21 votes.
Imran alleged that possible reasons for cross-voting by PDP MLAs include monetary inducements and access to power corridors, promises of perks and a more comfortable position, traditional alignment with the BJP, and a willingness to betray the interests of people in Jammu and Kashmir.
The NC’s allegations against the PDP followed an RTI reply which revealed that the PDP, which had three MLAs at the time of the Rajya Sabha elections, did not appoint authorised agents for the polls.
According to the Central Public Information Officer (CPIO) of the J&K Assembly Secretariat, seven authorised agents were appointed by three political parties, four by the National Conference, two by the BJP, and one by the Congress, to verify votes cast by their respective members in the J&K Assembly.
The RTI reply stated that, apart from the NC, BJP and Congress, no applications for appointing counting or authorised agents were received during the Rajya Sabha elections.
As per Rule 39AA of the Conduct of Election Rules, 1961, when a legislator belonging to a political party casts their vote in a Rajya Sabha election, the presiding officer must allow the party’s authorised agent to verify the vote before the ballot paper is placed in the ballot box.
The RTI response has raised questions about why the PDP, which did not field its own candidate but extended support to NC candidates, did not appoint authorised agents.
As debate over cross-voting intensifies once again, attention has turned to the identities of the seven MLAs who allegedly cross-voted or invalidated their votes.
Whether the names of the legislators who enabled the BJP’s surprise victory will ever be made public remains a million-dollar question.