A Public Interest Litigation (PIL) has been filed in the Supreme Court concerning allegations against the Election Commission. The petition calls for the formation of a Special Investigation Team (SIT), headed by a former judge, to investigate allegations made by Rahul Gandhi regarding manipulation of the voter list in the Bangalore Central constituency during the 2024 Lok Sabha elections.
The petition, filed by lawyer Rohit Pandey, cites a press conference held by Rahul Gandhi on August 7, where he questioned the transparency of the Election Commission concerning vote theft.
The petitioner has requested the Supreme Court to direct that no further amendments or finalizations be made to the voter lists until an independent audit of the voter lists is completed.
The petitioner has requested the court to establish clear rules for the Election Commission to ensure transparency and accountability in the preparation, maintenance, and publication of voter lists. They have demanded a system to detect and prevent duplicate or fake names. Additionally, it has been requested that voter lists be published in an accessible, machine-readable, and OCR-compliant format to enable proper verification and public scrutiny.
The petition, sent to the Chief Justice, references Rahul Gandhi’s press conference of August 7, in which he raised questions about the Election Commission’s transparency regarding vote theft. The petitioner claims to have independently investigated the allegations made by Rahul Gandhi and found several pieces of evidence that prove that there was an attempt to undermine the importance of valid votes and tamper with them. They stated that it is necessary for the Supreme Court to intervene, keeping in mind the public interest.
According to the petitioner, there were approximately 40,000 illegal voters and more than 10 duplicate names in the constituency. They explained that there were several instances where a single individual had different EPIC numbers in different states, whereas an individual should only have one EPIC number. Additionally, the addresses and fathers’ names of many voters were the same. Approximately 80 voters at a polling station gave the same small house address. They said that such examples raise serious doubts about the authenticity of the voter lists and, considering this, it cannot be denied that fraudulent voting took place.
The petitioner argued that if such large-scale tampering with the voter list is proven, it strikes at the foundation of the constitutional right of one person, one vote under Articles 325 and 326, undermines the value of valid votes, and violates the principles of equality and due process.
