A Public Interest Litigation (PIL) has been lodged in the Supreme Court, targeting the Election Commission over accusations of electoral irregularities. The PIL specifically seeks the establishment of a Special Investigation Team (SIT), led by a former judge, to scrutinize Rahul Gandhi’s allegations of voter list manipulation within the Bangalore Central constituency during the 2024 Lok Sabha elections.
The petition, filed by advocate Rohit Pandey, references Rahul Gandhi’s press conference on August 7, where he voiced concerns regarding the Election Commission’s transparency and the potential for vote fraud.
The petitioner urges the Supreme Court to mandate a halt to any further revisions or finalizations of voter lists until an independent audit is completed.
The petitioner also requests the court to formulate clear guidelines for the Election Commission, ensuring transparency and accountability in the creation, upkeep, and dissemination of voter lists. They propose measures to identify and prevent the inclusion of duplicate or fraudulent names. Furthermore, they advocate for the publication of voter lists in accessible, machine-readable, and OCR-compatible formats, facilitating proper verification and public inspection.
The petition presented to the Chief Justice highlights Rahul Gandhi’s August 7 press conference, where he raised questions about the Election Commission’s transparency concerning vote theft. The petitioner claims to have independently investigated Rahul Gandhi’s allegations, uncovering multiple instances suggesting an attempt to diminish the significance of legitimate votes and manipulate them. The petitioner underscores the urgency of Supreme Court intervention, citing the public interest.
The petitioner alleges the presence of approximately 40,000 illegitimate voters and more than 10 duplicate entries within the constituency. They provide examples of individuals possessing multiple EPIC numbers across different states, despite each person being entitled to only one. Furthermore, the petitioner notes instances where numerous voters shared identical home addresses and fathers’ names. In one instance, around 80 voters at a single polling station listed the same small house address. The petitioner asserts that these discrepancies raise serious questions about the integrity of the voter lists and suggest the potential for fraudulent voting practices.
The petitioner argues that if the alleged voter list tampering is substantiated, it undermines the constitutional principle of ‘one person, one vote’ enshrined in Articles 325 and 326, thereby devaluing valid votes and infringing upon the principles of equality and due process.