Recently, Congress scion Rahul Gandhi accused the Election Commission of inflating voter rolls with fictitious entries, citing irregularities like voters registered under “House Number 0.” He presented data from Mahadevapura in Bangalore Central, Karnataka, describing the situation as a major conspiracy to aid the ruling BJP.
However, an on-ground investigation has revealed that similar irregularities exist in Gandhi’s own constituency of Rae Bareli, Uttar Pradesh. Voter records there also show numerous entries under “House Number 0,” with several addresses listing dozens of voters similar to the examples Gandhi cited as suspicious.
In Rae Bareli’s voter list, one entry shows 27 people registered at a single residence, while two other addresses list 18 voters each. These patterns mirror the alleged discrepancies Gandhi highlighted elsewhere as signs of electoral malpractice. Rae Bareli has long been associated with the Gandhi family, previously represented by Sonia Gandhi and now by Rahul Gandhi.
This revelation raises a critical question, if such patterns are used to suggest voter fraud in constituencies won by the BJP, do they indicate the same in Gandhi’s own seat?
Experts Offer Context
Election experts clarify that in rural regions, many homes lack official numbers, often leading to “House Number 0” entries in the rolls. Similarly, large numbers of voters at one address are not unusual in India due to joint family structures, rented accommodations, or shared housing, particularly in semi-urban and rural areas. The Election Commission routinely updates records to correct such issues.
Despite this, Rahul Gandhi has criticized the Election Commission’s Summary Intensive Revision (SIR) process, which is specifically designed to clean up these kinds of anomalies. Even after being asked, he has declined to file a formal complaint.
Allegations Reflect Back on Gandhi
During a press briefing, Gandhi claimed that 80 individuals were registered under one address in Mahadevapura, which he pointed to as evidence of electoral fraud. Yet, in Rae Bareli, similar groupings appear at one polling booth, 27 voters are listed under House No. 8, and at two other booths, 18 voters each are registered at House Nos. 80 and 4.
This presents a political irony Gandhi’s accusations are now being echoed in his own constituency. In India’s large and complex voter system, such cases are not unusual. The Election Commission continues efforts to verify and update electoral rolls as part of standard procedure.
In states like Bihar, the SIR initiative is part of this broader effort to maintain accuracy in the rolls. Yet, Gandhi has been a vocal critic of this process and has actively campaigned against it. He also declined to submit a written complaint when the Commission requested one.
Mahadevapura Claim Questioned
Further undermining Gandhi’s claims, the assertion that 80 “fake voters” were listed at a single Mahadevapura address has been challenged. The Booth Level Officer, Muniratna, explained that the property in question is a rental where occupants frequently change. Voter registrations are often based on temporary rental agreements, and some entries may remain even after tenants leave. The Election Commission has already marked many of these for removal.
What began as Rahul Gandhi’s attempt to expose alleged electoral fraud has turned into a case of unintended self-implication. The very patterns he labeled suspicious are present in his own constituency, suggesting that these issues may be more systemic than conspiratorial.
(With inputs from OpIndia)
Subscribe to our channels on Telegram, WhatsApp, and Instagram and get the best stories of the day delivered to you personally.
