Poll panel says duplicate ID numbers do not imply fake voters
Media reports and social media posts over the past few days showed several voters from different states having the same EPIC number
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/58199/5819983c779db2f7ebaa45b001a7a848c1f9e46b" alt="Poll panel says duplicate ID numbers do not imply fake voters"
The Election Commission on Sunday stated that duplication of voter ID numbers issued in different states does not imply fake voters had been added to electoral rolls. The allotment of the same number to more than one voter was a result of states using the same alphanumeric series, it added.
The statement came after media reports and social media posts showed electors from different states having the same EPIC, or voter ID, numbers.
EPIC, or the Electors Photo Identification Card, is issued by the Election Commission and serves as identification proof for Indian citizens over the age of 18 to cast their vote in elections. The EPIC number is the voter ID card number
On Thursday, West Bengal Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee accused the Bharatiya Janata Party of colluding with the Election Commission to add fake voters to electoral lists in order to win the recent Assembly elections in Delhi and Maharashtra.
She accused the Hindutva party of hiring two agencies, Association of Billion Minds and India 360, to allegedly add residents of Gujarat, Rajasthan, Punjab and Haryana to West Bengal’s voter lists. The state will have its next Assembly election in 2026.
“The Election Commission has taken cognisance of certain social media posts and media reports flagging the issue of electors of two different states having identical EPIC numbers,” the poll panel stated on Sunday.
It added: “In this regard, it is clarified that while EPIC numbers of some of the electors may be identical, the other details including demographic details, Assembly Constituency and polling booth are different for the electors with the same EPIC number.”
On allegations by TMC about some voters in Haryana and West Bengal having same EPIC numbers (Voter ID number), ECI admits that “The allotment of identical EPIC number/series to some electors from different States/UTs was due to a decentralized and manual mechanism being followed… pic.twitter.com/0gNTZcqG38
— Arvind Gunasekar (@arvindgunasekar) March 2, 2025
The Election Commission said that a voter can cast their vote only at the designated polling station in the constituencies where they are enrolled in the electoral roll irrespective of their EPIC number.
“The allotment of identical EPIC number/series to some electors from different States/UTs was due to a decentralised and manual mechanism being followed prior to shifting of the electoral roll database of all States/UTs to the ERONET platform,” it said. “This resulted in certain State/UT CEO [chief Electrol Officer] offices using the same EPIC alphanumeric series and leaving a scope for the possibility of duplicate EPIC numbers being allotted to electors in different Assembly Constituencies in different States/UTs.”
ERONET is a common web-based system used by electoral officials in all states and Union Territories to manage election processes.
The poll body also noted that it had decided to ensure the allotment of unique EPIC number to registered electors to allay any apprehensions. “Any case of duplicate EPIC number will be rectified by allotting a unique EPIC number,” it added.
On Thursday, Banerjee claimed that the BJP was eyeing West Bengal after winning Assembly polls in Maharashtra and Delhi, but added her party would respond strongly. “Once again, ‘khela hobe’ [games will be played],” she said. “I ask workers to hit the ball harder this time.”
The Trinamool Congress chief also accused the Hindutva party of allegedly trying to influence electoral processes in the country by rushing to appoint Gyanesh Kumar as the new chief election commissioner.
Kumar’s appointment came hours after the meeting of the selection committee in which Congress leader Rahul Gandhi asked the Union government to defer the appointment until the Supreme Court decides on petitions challenging the selection process under a new law.