P.S. JIGNIHA PS 65
Candidate Name-Bajrang Bahadur Singh
COL 1515465 votes at this polling station
over Candidate Name-Virendra Chaudhary (COL 18)
The electorate
Vote share in this booth
Candidates at this booth
| # | Candidate | Party | Votes | Share | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Candidate Name-Bajrang Bahadur Singh | COL 15 | 465 | 65.31% | |
| 2 | Candidate Name-Virendra Chaudhary | COL 18 | 161 | 22.61% | |
| 3 | Candidate Name-Ishoo Chaurasiya | COL 12 | 45 | 6.32% | |
| 4 | Candidate Name-Shankh Lal Majhi | COL 21 | 28 | 3.93% | |
| 5 | Candidate Name-Suryaprakash Chaturvedi | COL 33 | 5 | 0.70% | |
| 6 | Candidate Name -Ravi Prakash Vishwakarma | COL 27 | 3 | 0.42% | |
| 7 | Candidate Name-Ashutosh | COL 36 | 2 | 0.28% | |
| 8 | Candidate Name-Jaili | COL 24 | 2 | 0.28% | |
| 9 | Candidate Name-Dr. Rajan Kumar Yadav | COL 30 | 1 | 0.14% |
Share is each candidate's votes over the 712 votes counted at this station, computed here from the candidate rows themselves — the source publishes no booth total of its own on this table.
Party status in this booth
Strong, Average, Weak and Poor are the source's own classification of a party's performance in a booth, carried through unchanged — we neither assign nor recompute them.
| Party | Votes | % of booth | Rank here | Booth rank for party | Status |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| COL 15 | 465 | 64.85% | 1 | 3 | Strong |
| COL 18 | 161 | 22.45% | 2 | 291 | Weak |
| COL 12 | 45 | 6.28% | 3 | 174 | Poor |
| COL 21 | 28 | 3.91% | 4 | 205 | Poor |
| COL 33 | 5 | 0.70% | 5 | 23 | Poor |
| COL 27 | 3 | 0.42% | 6 | 26 | Poor |
| COL 36 | 2 | 0.28% | 8 | 112 | Poor |
| COL 24 | 2 | 0.28% | 7 | 80 | Poor |
| COL 30 | 1 | 0.14% | 9 | 143 | Poor |
"Booth rank for party" is this station's position among every booth that party contested in AC 315, as ranked by the source.
Where this comes from
Polling-station Form 20 sheets for Uttar Pradesh, 2022 Vidhan Sabha. Booth data is Uttar Pradesh only: the source tables key on assembly-constituency number and carry no state column, so nothing here should be read as national coverage.