Union Home Minister Amit Shah on Wednesday delivered a sharp critique of the Congress in the Lok Sabha, arguing that allegations of electoral manipulation were not new and, in fact, had their roots in the early decades of Independent India. He said practices resembling “vote theft” could be traced back to the tenures of Jawaharlal Nehru and Indira Gandhi, and even linked a present-day dispute involving Sonia Gandhi’s voter registration before she became an Indian citizen.

Shah asserted that these examples revealed a long history of irregularities that predated the BJP by decades.

His comments came during a charged discussion on electoral reforms. Shah accused the Opposition of deliberately spreading misinformation about the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls and attempting to portray the Election Commission’s clean-up exercise as a politically driven attempt to remove voters. According to him, critics were pushing “one-sided narratives” to undermine the poll body.

He said the outrage from the Opposition whenever historical events were cited reflected their discomfort with facing facts. “Societies improve only when they acknowledge their past,” he said, adding that multiple voter list revisions under Congress governments from 1952 to 2004 were never questioned at the time.

SHAH’S THREE EXAMPLES OF ‘VOTE CHORI’

Shah highlighted three instances which he said illustrated Congress-era distortions:

1. Nehru becoming PM despite low support
According to Shah, Sardar Patel secured 28 votes in the leadership selection after Independence, while Nehru received only two—yet Nehru was chosen to lead the government.

2. Indira Gandhi’s response to the 1975 verdict
He claimed Indira Gandhi used constitutional powers to shield herself after the Allahabad High Court set aside her election.

3. Sonia Gandhi’s voter registration dispute
He pointed to a long-standing legal case concerning Sonia Gandhi allegedly being listed as a voter before receiving Indian citizenship. Congress MP KC Venugopal immediately objected, calling the claim inaccurate and urging Shah to provide proof.

‘SHOULD INFILTRATORS DECIDE INDIA’S LEADERS?’

Defending the SIR, Shah said some political groups were anxious because names of illegal immigrants would be removed. “Can infiltrators be allowed to determine who becomes Prime Minister or Chief Minister? Impossible,” he said.

He repeated that the SIR’s objective was to delete the deceased, remove foreign nationals, correct duplicates and include citizens who recently turned 18.

‘PARLIAMENT CANNOT INTERFERE WITH EC’S WORK’

Shah stressed that the SIR is solely within the Election Commission’s authority under Articles 325–327 of the Constitution. Citing a 1995 Supreme Court ruling (Lal Babu Hussein case), he said the EC has the power to verify citizenship and update rolls independently of the government.

RAHUL’S 501-VOTE CLAIM IS WRONG, SAYS SHAH

He dismissed Rahul Gandhi’s allegation that 501 votes originated from a single address in Haryana. Shah said the EC clarified that the location was a large ancestral property housing multiple families. “A false story was floated just to allege vote manipulation,” he said.

He accused the Opposition of inconsistency: “When they win, the EC is honest; when they lose, the EC is compromised.”

SPAT WITH RAHUL GANDHI

A brief clash erupted when Rahul Gandhi interrupted Shah. The Home Minister responded: “He cannot decide what I say. Parliament cannot work according to his provocation.” Rahul retorted that Shah sounded “afraid”, but the exchange quickly ended.

OPPOSITION LEADERS ACCUSED OF DAMAGING EC’S IMAGE

Shah said leaders like Mamata Banerjee, MK Stalin, Mallikarjun Kharge, Tejashwi Yadav, Akhilesh Yadav, Hemant Soren and Bhagwant Mann had repeatedly undermined the EC’s credibility. He also asked why the Opposition accepted victories if they believed the electoral rolls were flawed.

‘NDA HAS NEVER AVOIDED DEBATE’

Countering the claim that the government resisted discussion, Shah said: “The NDA never shies away from debate. Parliament is the greatest forum for dialogue.” He reiterated that while electoral reforms can be debated, the SIR itself cannot be deliberated upon because it is strictly an EC responsibility.

‘VOTER LISTS ARE NOT THE REASON FOR YOUR LOSSES’

Ending his speech, Shah told the Opposition that the EC’s revision drive was being carried out in response to their own complaints. “You demanded reforms; now you oppose the same reforms,” he said. “Old voter list or new one—your defeat does not depend on this. Elections are not won or lost because of the rolls.”