A Public Interest Litigation (PIL) has been filed in the Supreme Court, centered on allegations against the Election Commission regarding voter list integrity. The petition demands the establishment of a Special Investigation Team (SIT), led by a former judge, to probe claims made by Rahul Gandhi concerning the manipulation of voter lists in the Bangalore Central constituency during the 2024 Lok Sabha elections.
The petition, filed by attorney Rohit Pandey, points to a press conference held by Rahul Gandhi on August 7th, where concerns were raised about the Election Commission’s transparency and the integrity of the voter registration process.
The petitioner seeks a Supreme Court order to halt any additional revisions or finalizations of voter lists until an independent audit is fully completed.
The petitioner also calls for the court to mandate clear guidelines for the Election Commission to guarantee transparency and accountability in the compilation, maintenance, and publication of voter lists. Included in the petition is a request for mechanisms to identify and prevent duplicate or fraudulent entries. Additionally, the petitioner urges that voter lists be published in accessible, machine-readable, and OCR-compliant formats to allow for thorough verification and public examination.
The petition, directed to the Chief Justice, references Rahul Gandhi’s press conference from August 7, where he questioned the Election Commission’s transparency in relation to alleged vote theft. The petitioner claims to have independently investigated the allegations made by Rahul Gandhi, citing evidence suggesting that the importance of valid votes was undermined and the electoral process was tampered with. The petitioner emphasized the need for the Supreme Court’s intervention in the interest of the public.
The petitioner asserts that there were around 40,000 illegitimate voters and over 10 duplicate names in the constituency. They highlight examples of individuals with multiple EPIC numbers across different states, despite the rule of a single EPIC number per person. Furthermore, the petition points out instances of voters sharing identical home addresses and fathers’ names. As an example, at one polling station, approximately 80 voters provided the same small house address. The petitioner claims that these anomalies cast doubt on the legitimacy of the voter lists, potentially indicating instances of fraudulent voting.
The petitioner argues that if such widespread manipulation of the voter list is substantiated, it infringes on the constitutional right of ‘one person, one vote,’ outlined in Articles 325 and 326, thereby devaluing valid votes and violating the principles of equality and due process.