The Election Commission’s internal records show discrepancies between the number of votes recorded as cast and those counted on electronic voting machines (EVMs) in 51 constituencies across Maharashtra, Haryana and Jammu and Kashmir during the 2024 elections, according to an investigation by The Reporters’ Collective.
The investigation, part of its Election Audit series, examined records from 530 assembly and parliamentary constituencies across the three states and the Union Territory. It found that in 32 electoral contests, the number of votes recorded as polled did not match the number counted on EVMs.
In 19 of the 51 constituencies, election officials had entered ‘zero’ or ‘nil’ against the number of voters who had entered polling booths, the report said. Ten of these seats were in Maharashtra and Haryana, seven of which were won by the BJP or its allies. The report flagged several constituencies where the differences were particularly large.
In Haryana’s Badkhal assembly seat, the ECI’s internal records showed 3.32 lakh votes as polled, while the declared count on EVMs stood at 1.60 lakh. Congress candidate Vijay Pratap Singh, who lost the seat to BJP’s Dhanesh Adlakha by 6,181 votes, had approached the Punjab and Haryana High Court alleging vote theft and seeking election records and CCTV footage.
A similar discrepancy was found in Mumbai North, where Union minister Piyush Goyal won the Lok Sabha seat. The internal records showed 18.11 lakh votes polled, while the ECI’s declared count was 10.33 lakh, a difference of 7.78 lakh votes, the report said.
In Haryana’s Kaithal assembly constituency, the records showed that just 215 voters had cast their votes, even as 1,67,285 votes were counted on EVMs. In Srinagar’s parliamentary constituency, the number of votes counted was 6,896 more than the number recorded as polled.
Of the 32 constituencies where the two figures did not match, votes counted on EVMs were fewer than votes recorded as polled in 12 seats. In the remaining 20, the EVM count was higher. The investigation said such differences could point to possible bogus voting or voter suppression, though minor variations may occur in cases where a voter enters a polling booth but does not cast a vote.
The Reporters’ Collective said it digitised and rechecked 4,212 physical records submitted by returning officers. It could not obtain the report for Devsar constituency in Jammu and Kashmir.
The report also raised concerns over the ECI’s decision to stop making booth-level polling data public after the 2019 general elections. Such records, it said, allow voters and political parties to independently check whether the number of people who voted matches the number of votes recorded.
The organisation said it had sent detailed questions to the ECI. However, the commission treated the queries as a grievance and asked it to submit the data it had accessed, assuring that the information would remain confidential.
The findings come amid opposition allegations of irregularities in the 2024 elections. The ECI has rejected claims of poll rigging in Maharashtra and Haryana, maintaining that the electoral process was conducted properly. The Reporters’ Collective said it would make the raw data and original election records public in the concluding part of its investigation.
Report Sparks Debate On X
The findings triggered a debate on social media, with several users questioning the discrepancies and demanding greater transparency from the Election Commission.
A user identified as Bharat Joshi asked why the matter had not been taken to the Supreme Court, questioning the role of political parties and their polling agents during the counting process.
“How about approaching Supreme Court with your data? What were the parties and their agents doing? They have to refuse to sign the Form 17C. The losing candidate should file a petition. Why wait for newspapers to report it?” he posted on X.
Other users questioned whether the discrepancies pointed to wider irregularities in elections and called for the release of the underlying data.
“The strongest evidence to push these allegations into actual crime is not releasing data publicly. The more they hide, the more concrete it becomes,” one user wrote. Another post claimed that the 2024 election had been rigged, while another questioned the credibility of elections held since 2019.
“Blatant rigging is called free and fair elections!” another user wrote.
Some posts went further, alleging that the findings raised questions about the legitimacy of the present government. One user claimed that Prime Minister Narendra Modi was “an illegal PM” and described the government as illegal.
The reactions reflect the political debate surrounding the report, although the discrepancies cited in the investigation do not by themselves establish that elections were rigged.
Disclaimer : This story is auto aggregated by a computer programme and has not been created or edited by DOWNTHENEWS. Publisher: deccanchronicle.com
