Exercising one’s franchise is one right many Mumbaikars don’t want to enjoy, especially if it means jostling in serpentine queues on a hot October morning, waiting for your turn to cast your vote. Little womder then, that the city maintained its record of posting a sub-50 per cent turnout despite support from shopping malls–many remained shut during voting hours — and the fact that polling was held mid-week, and that offices were generally shut that day.

Could the numbers have been better, even marginally? My own experience at the booth seems to indicate so. The lady just ahead of me in the queue, who produced her ration card as proof of identity, was told bluntly that she wouldn’t be allowed to vote as the proof wasn’t valid. “Go back home and get something better,” she was told. Just as she was about to turn away, I intervened and told the election officer that she wouldn’t come back if she left without casting her vote. He wasn’t moved. Rules are rules, you see.

He was right, there is no dispute about that. The Election Commissioner has clearly stated that ration cards will be allowed as proof only if the entire family comes together to the polling station to cast their votes.

However, couldn’t the rules have been bent a little here? A photograph of each voter is in any case available at the booth and all the officer on duty had to do was to take one look at the photograph to ascertain whether or not the voter was genuine.

In places that have gained notoriety for booth capturing, bogus voting and other malpractices, the stick-by-the-rules approach of the kind displayed by the election officer is perfectly understandable. But Mumbai? For heaven’s sake this city is known more for its citizens’ apathy to get their butts to the neighbourhood polling station than anything else.

On the one hand the government is throwing away crores of rupees on high-decibel awareness campaigns to get a stubborn Mumbaikar to vote, on the other a genuine voter is being deprived of her fundamental right only because she didn’t tag her family along. Had she brought her family, would it have lent authenticity to the document she produced?

These were some of the arguments I presented before the officer. And he bought them. The lady was ushered in. So far, so good.

But wait, the story doesn’t end here. When my turn came, this guy seemed to have a problem with my press card. I had already waited quite long and didn’t have the energy to get into another argument. So I simply took out my PAN card and cast my vote.

That was yesterday, Octber 13, 2009. This afternoon, I googled to see what was and what wasn’t acceptable as valid proof, and found that my press card was perfectly valid. One website lists as many as 17 documents that can be used as identity proof. However, I guess it was the way the proof was described (see below for verbatim description) that confused the poor officer on poll duty.

Service Identity Cards with photograph issued to its employees by State/Central Government, Public Sector Undertakings or Public Limited Companies.

Isn’t a press card issued by a newspaper standard proof, if the publication is owned by a public limited company? I believe it is and that this time around, the officer was wrong.

I could have started another argument here, but relented, as the people behind me started making a noise. Couldn’t blame them — it was indeed a hot October morning. So i did the next best thing, Flashed my PAN card and exercised my precious franchise.

The point I am making here is that it would help if poll officers were instilled with the ability to distinguish not just between authentic and fake proof, but also between genuine and fake voters, before making this big hue and cry about Mumbai voter apathy. Who knows, how many have stopped visiting the local booth because of similar treatment meted out to them in previous elections?