Rahul Gandhi Accuses Election Commission of Facilitating Vote Theft

Rahul Gandhi Accuses Election Commission of Facilitating Vote Theft

Date of Press Conference: 7 August 2025
Venue: Indira Bhawan, New Delhi
Main Focus: Alleged voter list fraud in Karnataka’s Mahadevapura constituency and across India.

 Introduction

On 7 August 2025, Indira Bhawan in New Delhi became the epicentre of a political storm as Congress leader Rahul Gandhi took the stage to make explosive allegations against the Election Commission of India (ECI). He accused the poll body of facilitating large-scale voter fraud, which he termed “Vote Chori” (vote theft).

Flanked by party colleagues, Gandhi presented documents, examples, and alleged proof of irregularities in the Mahadevapura Assembly constituency of Karnataka. His charges went beyond a local issue, claiming that similar fraudulent voter roll patterns existed in other parts of the country — all pointing to a deliberate manipulation in favor of the ruling BJP.

His speech combined allegations, evidence claims, and a warning about the consequences of undermining India’s democratic foundation. Speaking with urgency, he claimed that the very foundation of Indian democracy was under attack and that the EC had failed its constitutional responsibility to conduct free and fair elections. Gandhi asserted that his team had gathered “clear, solid proof” of malpractice in multiple constituencies and demanded that the Commission release complete, transparent polling data for every booth.

Rahul Gandhi took reporters through a detailed presentation of the alleged fraud at Congress headquarters. “The Congress won all the Vidhan Sabhas [six out of seven] except Mahadevapura, where the BJP swept and secured a victory margin of 1,14,046 votes. This seat significantly contributed to their election win, and the Lok Sabha result went in their favour on that seat,” Mr. Gandhi

Rahul Gandhi listed out five different ways through which the alleged vote chori (theft) was done: duplicate voters, fake and invalid addresses, bulk voters at a single address, invalid photos, and the misuse of Form 6.

According to Rahul Gandhi in the whole Lok Sabha seat, the Congress got 6,26,208 votes while the BJP got 6,58,915, a margin of 32,707.Gandhi pointed out that while the Congress won six out of seven segments, it lost in the Mahadevapura Assembly segment in which it was defeated by over 1,14,000 votes. He claimed there was “vote chori” of 1,00,250 votes in the constituency with 11,965 duplicate voters in one assembly segment, 40,009 voters with fake and invalid addresses, 10,452 bulk voters or single address voters, 4,132 voters with invalid photos and 33,692 voters misusing Form 6 of new voters.

They were demanding the EC a soft copy voter list but they were rejecting it. When we demanded video, they rejected it and changed the law. They said that they should destroy the video after 45 days as Rahul Gandhi said in press conference.

—

1. Democracy under Siege

Rahul Gandhi opened his speech with a grim observation — “Democracy doesn’t exist here anymore.” He argued that the difference between India and other nations, once defined by free and fair elections, had been erased. According to him, the EC was no longer an impartial referee but an active participant in subverting the will of the people. Using the example of the Karnataka Lok Sabha seat, he claimed the election there was “stolen” and that similar incidents had occurred in many other constituencies.

2. Accusations Against the Election Commission

Rahul Gandhi alleged that the EC had failed in its constitutional duty to ensure free and fair elections. Using the example of a specific constituency, Karnataka, he claimed there was clear evidence of electoral malpractice where votes were manipulated or stolen. He insisted that this was not an isolated case but something that had happened in multiple seats across the country.

—

3. Evidence and Proof

Rahul Gandhi stated that for months, the opposition had been warning about electoral malpractice, but now they had clear, solid proof of the EC’s complicity in stealing the Indian election. He characterized the alleged actions as “a fraud on the people of India” and “an insult to every person who believes in democracy.”

4. The Five Methods of Vote Theft

Rahul Gandhi outlined what he described as a systematic, multi-layered electoral fraud mechanism. According to him, over 1 lakh votes in Mahadevapura were suspect. Rahul Gandhi outlined *five specific ways* in which votes were allegedly stolen, supported by booth-level data and visual evidence.

Method 1: Duplicate Votes – 11,965 cases

Multiple votes were allegedly cast in the name of the same voter, often without their knowledge. Rahul Gandhi claimed that in certain booths, the total votes exceeded the number of registered voters. Some individuals reportedly voted in multiple locations, including different states. The same name often appeared multiple times in the electoral roll, sometimes with minor spelling changes to bypass detection.

• Proof: Booth-wise electoral roll analysis showing identical names repeated multiple times.
• Figures: In some booths, 50–100 duplicate votes were recorded.

Method 2: Address Fraud – 40,009 cases

Voter IDs were allegedly issued using fake or non-existent addresses, allowing ineligible individuals to vote. These included addresses that did not exist, were unoccupied, or belonged to commercial buildings, vacant plots, or demolished properties.

• Proof: Cross-verification of voter lists with actual residential data revealed large groups of voters registered at the same false address.
• Figures: Hundreds of such fraudulent entries found in key constituencies.

Method 3: Bogus Voters – Mass Registrations at a Single Address – 10,452 cases

Names of deceased individuals or people who had relocated allegedly remained on voter rolls, with votes cast in their names. In several cases, dozens of voters were shown as residing in one small property — sometimes over 50 names at a single 1BHK flat.

• Proof: Electoral rolls compared with government death and migration records.
• Figures: In some booths, 5–10% of total votes came from such bogus entries.

Method 4: Mismatched ID Photographs – 4,132 cases

Votes were reportedly allowed despite mismatches in voter ID details such as names, photos, or ages, enabling impersonation. In some cases, photographs were unclear or micro-sized, and did not match the actual voter’s appearance.

• Proof: Polling day registers where signatures or photos did not match official ID records.
• Figures: Dozens of such mismatched votes in individual booths, adding up to thousands overall.

Method 5: Cross-Constituency Voting – Misuse of Form-6 – 33,692 cases

Form-6, used for enrolling new voters (who can directly vote for the Prime Minister in general elections), was allegedly misused. Individuals were registered in multiple constituencies and in some cases voted in more than one seat, exploiting gaps in Election Commission monitoring. Gandhi claimed large-scale Form-6 approvals were done without proper verification.

• Proof: Matching of voter lists across constituencies showing the same person registered in multiple locations.
• Figures: Instances found where voters were registered in two or even three constituencies.

5. Demand for Transparency

Rahul Gandhi called on the Election Commission to release complete and transparent information booth-wise Form 17C data to the public. Gandhi argued that the people of India had the right to know the truth about how their votes were counted and whether irregularities occurred. He insisted that without full disclosure, the EC was complicit in covering up the theft. “The people of India have the right to know,” he declared, warning that refusal would have consequences.

—

6. Warning to Those Involved

Addressing individuals within the EC and those allegedly involved in vote manipulation, Gandhi declared that it did not matter — regardless of rank or position those complicit in undermining democracy would eventually face accountability. He cautioned that the opposition would not remain silent forever and would one day “come too far” for the perpetrators to hide from responsibility.

7. Protection of the Freedom Struggle’s Legacy

Rahul Gandhi framed the issue as a betrayal of India’s democratic heritage. “You are attacking the foundations of what our freedom fighters built,” he said, vowing that the opposition would not allow the pillars of democracy to be destroyed “no matter who you are.”

 The Immediate ECI Response – Invoking Rule 20(3)(b)

Karnataka CEO’s Response

Shortly after the press conference, the Chief Electoral Officer (CEO) of Karnataka issued a formal notice to Rahul Gandhi. The letter invoked Rule 20(3)(b) of the Representation of Electors Rules, 1960,

The CEO’s letter cited Rule 20(3)(b) of the Representation of Electors Rules, 1960, which states that, which requires any person making allegations about the accuracy of an electoral roll to submit a sworn affidavit or signed declaration.

• If a person claims the electoral roll contains errors or fraudulent entries, they must submit a signed declaration or affidavit under oath.
• The declaration must specify the names and details of the disputed entries.
• If proven false, the person making the statement can face legal consequences for perjury.

The CEO requested Gandhi to:

• Provide the complete list of alleged fake voters.
• Submit the allegations in affidavit form under oath, warning that false evidence could lead to prosecution.

This official move signaled the Election Commission’s intent to treat Gandhi’s claims as a formal legal matter, not just a political statement.

5. Why Rule 20(3)(b) Matters

Rule 20(3)(b) is significant because:

• It ensures that allegations are backed by responsibility and legal accountability.
• It prevents baseless claims that could undermine public trust in elections.
• Once an affidavit is submitted, the ECI is legally bound to verify the claims.

In this case, if Gandhi complies, the ECI would need to initiate an official investigation, possibly leading to major roll revisions.

Upping the ante over Rahul Gandhi’s poll rigging claims, the Congress has launched a web page where people can register to demand accountability from the Election Commission of India (ECI) against what it called “vote chori” and express support for his demand for digital voter rolls.

Mr. Gandhi urged people to support this demand by registering on votechori.in/ecdemand.

Once a person registers on the portal, a certificate is issued in his name, which states that he stand against “vote chori”.

Conclusion

Rahul Gandhi’s speech was both an accusation and a call to action. By presenting detailed methods, figures, and alleged proof of vote theft, he aimed to galvanize public awareness and pressure the Election Commission into transparency. Whether these allegations lead to institutional reform or political upheaval remains to be seen, but his address has injected fresh urgency into the ongoing debate about the integrity of India’s electoral process.

Also Read:
Rights of undertrial prisoners in India
How To Send A Legal Notice In India