ECI Rebuts Vote Chori Claims, Complies with SC Order to Publish Deleted Voters — Full Legal Rundown
The Election Commission of India (ECI) has strongly rebutted Rahul Gandhi’s charges of “vote chori” in Bihar’s Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls, calling the allegations baseless and misleading. Chief Election Commissioner (CEC) Gyanesh Kumar addressed the issue directly, setting out the Commission’s position in five clear points:
1. “Vote Chori” Claims Misleading: A Disrespect to the Constitution
CEC Gyanesh Kumar declared that the use of the phrase “vote chori” amounts to a disrespect to the Constitution. He underscored that the ECI has always treated all political parties equally and remained steadfast in its constitutional mandate of impartiality.
2. Affidavit or Apology: “Submit Evidence or Say Sorry”
The CEC issued a direct challenge to Rahul Gandhi. He asked him to either file a sworn affidavit within seven days substantiating the allegations or issue a public apology. Without evidence, Kumar said, the accusations remain “baseless” and risk undermining public trust in elections.
3. Duplicate Entries Do Not Mean Fraud: “Zero House Numbers” Explained
Responding to anomalies flagged by the Congress leader, such as multiple entries at the same address or suspicious “zero” house numbers, the ECI clarified that:
• Zero is a placeholder used for unnumbered residences such as informal settlements or roadside habitations.
• Duplicate names are not proof of double voting since casting more than one vote is a punishable offence and no evidence of such practice has been provided.
4. Data Misrepresentation by Rahul Gandhi
CEC Kumar accused Rahul Gandhi of manipulating official EC data to create a narrative of malpractice. He insisted that the public is aware of the Commission’s neutrality and integrity and cautioned against selective use of statistics for political gain.
5. Transparency Through the Supreme Court Order
The ECI stressed its compliance with judicial oversight. Within 56 hours of the Supreme Court’s August 14 directive, it uploaded the names of 65 lakh deleted voters along with reasons for each removal. Citizens have until September 1 to file objections. The Commission said this demonstrates its commitment to transparency and accountability.
The Background: How the Controversy Began
The present row stems from the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls initiated by the ECI in June 2025 in Bihar. The revision aimed at cleaning and updating the voter list ahead of the upcoming assembly elections.
Under the notification, all residents were asked to register afresh, and those not listed in the 2003 rolls were required to provide new supporting documents. Notably, common IDs like Aadhaar, voter ID and ration cards were initially excluded as primary proof, raising alarms about potential disenfranchisement, particularly in a state marked by high migration and poor documentation.
By August 2025, Congress leader Rahul Gandhi mounted a political campaign titled the “Voter Adhikar Yatra.” During this campaign, he accused the ECI of orchestrating “vote chori,” or voter theft, and cited anomalies including:
• Thousands of duplicate entries
• 80 voters allegedly registered at a single address
• Erroneous entries with nonsensical “father names”
• Unexplained deletion of valid voters
The Supreme Court’s Intervention
On August 14, 2025, the Supreme Court of India issued an interim order in response to challenges against the SIR. The Court directed the ECI to:
• Publish online a booth-wise, district-wise, searchable list of approximately 65 lakh voters deleted from the rolls, with reasons such as death, migration or duplication.
• Accept both Aadhaar and voter ID as valid identity documents for the process.
• Continue with the SIR process, refusing to impose an interim stay.
Complying promptly, the ECI uploaded the lists within 56 hours on state and central electoral websites, along with deletion reasons. Citizens have been given until September 1 to raise objections or seek corrections.
Why It Matters
The controversy has become one of the most closely watched election law disputes in recent years, balancing concerns of electoral transparency, constitutional fairness and political accountability. While the Congress continues to press its allegations, the ECI has sought to reaffirm public trust by citing its adherence to both constitutional duty and Supreme Court oversight.