ECI dismisses vote rigging claims over 2024 Haryana, Maharashtra elections

India’s Election Commission has rejected allegations of vote-counting discrepancies in the 2024 Haryana and Maharashtra elections, saying figures cited to suggest possible electoral manipulation have been incorrectly interpreted.

The clarification follows an investigation by The Reporters’ Collective, published on November 10, which flagged differences between the number of voters recorded as having cast their ballots and the votes eventually counted through Electronic Voting Machines (EVMs).

The investigation examined internal election records covering 530 Assembly and parliamentary constituencies across Maharashtra, Haryana and Jammu and Kashmir. It identified 51 constituencies where the records raised questions about the reconciliation of votes cast and votes counted.

According to the investigation, 32 electoral contests showed differences between the two sets of figures. In another 19 constituencies, election officials had reportedly entered zero or nil against the number of voters who entered polling booths.

The findings raised questions about the maintenance of election records and the Election Commission’s mechanisms for identifying and addressing such discrepancies.

However, ECI sources have disputed the interpretation of some of the figures, arguing that the total number of registered voters was incorrectly presented as the number of people who actually voted.

What the Election Commission says

The Commission cited Haryana’s Badkhal Assembly constituency as an example. While a figure of 3,32,253 was cited as the number of votes polled, the ECI clarified that this represented the constituency’s total registered electorate.

According to the Commission, 1,60,553 electors actually voted, recording a turnout of 48.32 per cent. After accounting for rejected postal ballots, rejected EVM votes and NOTA, the final valid vote count stood at 1,58,475.

A similar explanation was offered for Mumbai North parliamentary constituency in Maharashtra. The figure of approximately 18.11 lakh referred to the total number of registered electors and not the number of votes cast.

The ECI said around 10.33 lakh people voted in the constituency, with turnout recorded at approximately 57 per cent. It maintained that the final figures were consistent after accounting for routine exclusions.

The Commission has also argued that differences between the number of people entering polling booths and the final valid vote count can arise from procedural factors, including rejected ballots and voters who enter a polling station but do not cast a vote.

Questions over transparency remain

The investigation has renewed attention on the records maintained during elections, particularly Form 17C, which documents the votes recorded at individual polling stations.

The Reporters’ Collective has questioned the lack of public access to certain internal election records and argued that discrepancies should be examined through transparent verification.

The findings, however, do not independently establish that votes were deliberately manipulated. Equally, the ECI’s explanation of the Badkhal and Mumbai North figures does not, by itself, resolve every discrepancy identified in the wider investigation.

The debate has once again brought the transparency of India’s electoral process into focus, with the accuracy of polling records and the accountability of election officials emerging as key issues.