Haryana Vote Chori: Rahul Gandhi and the Brazilian Model Claim
Rahul Gandhi’s explosive “vote chori” (vote theft) claim in Haryana has shaken Indian politics. The Congress leader alleged that a single photograph of a Brazilian model appeared on several voter IDs under different names — Seema, Sweety, Saraswati — across ten polling booths in Rai constituency. According to him, the image was repeated 22 times, pointing to large-scale voter roll manipulation.
The charge instantly caught public attention. If true, it would strike at the foundation of Indian democracy — one person, one vote. Yet, as media investigations unfolded, the story began to appear far less sensational.
Ground Reports Challenge the “22 Votes” Claim
Fact-checking teams from The Indian Express and NDTV investigated the claim on the ground. They discovered that while one voter card did carry the Brazilian model’s photo, there was no evidence of 22 duplicate IDs. Every name Rahul Gandhi cited belonged to a legitimate voter, most with correct photographs. The mismatch, they found, was likely a clerical or printing error, not a deliberate fraud.
Reporters also observed other inconsistencies in Haryana’s voter lists — missing names, shared house numbers, and minor data errors — common in large-scale electoral databases. Experts say such patterns can appear suspicious but do not necessarily prove systematic rigging.
How Rahul’s Team Found the Image
Rahul Gandhi explained that his team discovered these anomalies while scrutinizing finalized electoral rolls after receiving “numerous complaints” from Haryana voters. The Congress data cell, he said, was puzzled when postal ballot results heavily favored the party while BJP maintained its lead in physical votes. To probe the discrepancy, the team “zoomed into Haryana” and found what Gandhi called “shocking irregularities.”
He presented a voter list page showing the model’s photo under different names and shared it publicly, declaring it “100% proof” of vote theft. However, the Election Commission of India clarified that Congress had filed no formal objectionduring the voter-roll revision phase — a key procedural step for such claims.
Critics argue that without third-party audits, the evidence remains inconclusive. Analysts add that digital records, when poorly printed or merged, can produce duplicate-like patterns without any foul play.
Even if this turns out to be a single printing mistake, the controversy reveals deep mistrust between political parties and electoral institutions. For Congress, the episode fuels a narrative of manipulated democracy; for BJP, it’s proof of opposition desperation.
Either way, one mistaken photograph has sparked a nationwide debate on the transparency and credibility of India’s election system — and that debate is far from over.
Prerna Varshney is a journalist and social commentator with over five years of experience in health, gender, and policy reporting. Her work reflects a deep commitment to truth and empathy, simplifying complex issues for everyday readers.
