Jharkhand Mukti Morcha (JMM) on Thursday claimed that till the date of polling, held at a total of 50 seats in three phases of Jharkhand Assembly elections, the candidates of Grand Alliance, which consist of Indian National Congress (INC) and Rashtriya Janata Dal (RJD), will bag 41 seats which is majority number in the house of 81 members.
Addressing a press meet, JMM General Secretary, Supriyo Bhattacharya said that the party candidates have performed their best at Silli, Ranchi, Ichagarh, Mandu and Dhanwar seats and they will win with huge margin. “The candidates of Grand Alliance will win 15 to 16 seats where the polling held for the third phase of the State Assembly elections and Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) will win only one or two seats otherwise one seat can go to independent candidate. There is environment of change in entire State and people voted to change the Government,” he added.
Hitting hard on Prime Minister Narendra Modi for using divisive tactics while campaigning for the BJP candidate in Dhanbad, Bhattacharya said that the Prime Minister did not raise issues of Jharkhand in his address, he only tried to disorient people on religious basis because they have no other issue to talk about.
“Once again BJP Government is trying to disrupt JMM’s poll campaign by misusing its power. They are going to organise an election rally of Prime Minister at Dumka Air Port which will cause disruption for Shibu Soren’s chopper landing— star campaigner of JMM. Earlier they disrupted JMM executive president, Hemant Soren’s election rally organised at Khunti by same reason,” said Bhattacharya.
Expressing concern over low polling in urban areas, the party General Secretary said that even after repeated appeals by the party, urban voters showed less interest in casting their votes as compared to rural voters which is the matter of great concern. “Voter belongs to middle class who have been casting their votes in large numbers till now failed to throng the polling booths like earlier. We have talked to several people on this matter; they replied that they have voted the person five years earlier whose name, this time, they do not want to see in the ballot paper. After our request, they agreed to vote,” he added.