Allegations of voter fraud from both the Congress-led UDF and CPI(M)-led LDF have put the state’s electoral credibility under the scanner, even as the Chief Electoral Officer of Kerala vehemently denied any wrongdoing.
Published Aug 11, 2025 | 5:32 PM ⚊ Updated Aug 11, 2025 | 5:32 PM
Both LDF and UDF alleged electoral roll manipulation in Thrissur Lok Sabha constituency, where Suresh Gopi of the BJP won.
Synopsis: CPI leader and former MLA VS Sunil Kumar accused the Election Commission of India of facilitating voter list manipulation in Kerala’s Thrissur constituency during the 2024 Lok Sabha polls. Thrissur was the only seat in Kerala won by the BJP, with Union Minister and actor-turned-politician Suresh Gopi defeating Sunil Kumar of the Left Democratic Front and K Muraleedharan of the United Democratic Front.
When Rahul Gandhi’s sensational “vote chori (theft)” charge sent political shockwaves across the country, very few imagined Kerala would soon feel its tremors.
But with Thrissur — the stage for the BJP’s historic debut win in the state — and now Alappuzha pulled into the controversy, the national storm has found a distinctly Kerala twist.
Allegations of voter fraud from both the Congress-led UDF and CPI(M)-led LDF have put the state’s electoral credibility under the scanner, even as the Chief Electoral Officer of Kerala (CEO) vehemently denied any wrongdoing.
On the same day Leader of Opposition in the Lok Sabha, Rahul Gandhi, made explosive allegations of fake voters in BJP-held seats across Maharashtra, Karnataka, and Haryana, CPI leader and former MLA VS Sunil Kumar accused the Election Commission of India (ECI) of facilitating voter list manipulation in Kerala’s Thrissur constituency during the 2024 Lok Sabha polls.
Thrissur was the only seat in Kerala won by the BJP, with Union Minister and actor-turned-politician Suresh Gopi defeating Sunil Kumar of the Left Democratic Front (LDF) and K Muraleedharan of the United Democratic Front (UDF).
Sunil Kumar, who contested the Thrissur seat for the LDF, claimed on 7 August that the voter rolls were deliberately tampered with to benefit the BJP.
According to him, voters from other constituencies such as Alathur and Tripunithura were added to Thrissur’s list, and non-residents — including migrant workers — were illegally enrolled using relaxed verification norms.
“Even a postcard or a courier receipt was enough to prove the address. Such dilution of rules enabled outsiders to be fraudulently added to the Thrissur rolls,” he told reporters, warning that the issue has “serious political and constitutional implications.”
Sunil Kumar alleged that BJP workers added new voters after the publication of the draft electoral roll. He said his chief election agent, KP Rajendran, filed a formal complaint with the Chief Election Commissioner on 25 March 2024, including a list of suspected names. However, the CEC dismissed the concerns as baseless, claiming no timely complaint was lodged and procedures were followed.
He further alleged that Thrissur’s then Chief Electoral Officer, former District Collector VR Krishna Teja, may have misled the CEC. “The claim that we failed to approach the High Court in time is false. It raises the question — who was being protected?” he asked.
The CPI leader also said that LDF agents flagged suspicious voters during polling, but officials refused to intervene, insisting that anyone on the rolls had the right to vote.
He demanded a Supreme Court-monitored probe, accusing the BJP of colluding with officials to “stack the deck” in its favour.
The Thrissur District Congress Committee (DCC) echoed the CPI’s concerns, alleging large-scale irregularities in the voters’ list.
DCC president Advocate Joseph Tajet accused Suresh Gopi and his family of being among those illegally added to the electoral roll. He claimed that the names of Gopi, his brother Subhash Gopi, and other family members were entered in Booth No. 116 under serial numbers 1016 to 1026, using the address “Bharath Heritage,” house number 10/219/2 — despite them no longer residing there.
Tajet said these names still appear as active voters in the Election Commission’s Voter Helpline app, even though they are absent from the Thrissur Corporation’s official voters’ list for the relevant division.
He also cited Booth No. 30 as another example, where 45 individuals were allegedly registered under non-existent or unoccupied addresses, such as Capital Gardens, Top Paradise, Chaitram IDBI, Capital Village, and Sreesankari Apartments.
Similar patterns, he claimed, were found in multiple housing complexes, including Shobha Sapphire, Shobha City, Chelur Country Court, Shakthi Apartments, Water Lily Flats, Govind Apartments, and Shobha Top Plaza — none of which matched the Corporation’s rolls.
“These are not stray errors but signs of a systematic attempt to pad the voter list,” Tajet said, demanding a high-level inquiry.
Both the CPI and the Congress have warned that failure to investigate these allegations would undermine public trust in the electoral process.
They maintain that what happened in Thrissur was not a clerical error but a deliberate and coordinated manipulation of the voters’ list to influence the outcome of the 2024 Lok Sabha election.
The fake vote controversy connected with Thrissur has taken a dramatic twist, with fresh allegations of voter list manipulation surfacing from an upscale apartment complex in Punkunnam.
Residents of Capital Village Apartments claimed that nine votes were fraudulently registered under the address of a single flat — No. 4C — occupied by a lone woman.
The names in question, including Monisha, Ajayakumar, Akhil TS, Sajith Babu PS, Sugesh, Sudhir, and Manish, appeared in the 4 April electoral roll.
Neighbours insisted that none of these individuals had ever lived there, either as tenants or owners.
“I have been here for nine years, and no one by those names has stayed in this flat,” a neighbour told reporters on Monday, 11 August.
Even the fathers’ names listed in the rolls, residents allege, have no connection to the building.
The flat’s occupant, Prasanna Ashokan, is equally baffled. “I am the only voter in this house. I don’t know how these other names got added,” she said, adding that she had raised a similar complaint during the previous election, to no avail.
She alleged that her rent agreement was misused to make the fake entries, and that some of these votes were cast.
Ashokan also added that some had then approached her to file a complaint, and she had signed that petition. But nothing happened.
Local Congress leaders in Punkunnam say the anomaly was first spotted on polling day, while distributing voter slips.
They alleged the names were included in the final update to the rolls, just before the election, and that similar cases may exist across Thrissur’s 1,275 booths.
The party has also accused Minister Gopi and his family of being listed as Thrissur voters despite residing in Thiruvananthapuram, calling it a criminal offence punishable by up to one year in prison.
The CPI is equally scathing. Sunil Kumar said the Punkunnam case was a “serious lapse” in election management and claimed that complaints filed jointly by him and DCC president Taget with the Election Commission went nowhere.
He also cited the case of BJP leader KR Shaji and his wife, who allegedly voted in Thrissur during the Lok Sabha polls using a flat address, only to later cast votes in Nadathara during local body elections after shifting their voter IDs.
Both the UDF and LDF allege that the BJP inflated voter numbers in city flats by bringing in people from other constituencies to bolster Gopi’s chances.
They accused former collector and returning officer Teja of failing to escalate complaints to higher authorities.
CPI state secretary Binoy Viswam on 11 August accused the BJP of turning Thrissur — once hailed as Kerala’s cultural capital — into a “capital of political hypocrisy and fake votes.”
Alleging large-scale irregularities in the voter list, including fake addresses and entries linked to unoccupied flats, Viswam demanded a comprehensive probe by the Election Commission.
He criticised the Commission for allegedly acting in favour of the Centre, citing the removal of 65 lakh voters in Bihar without political consultation and its “evasive” stance on fraud allegations in Karnataka. Viswam urged the poll body to uphold faith in a free and fair electoral process by thoroughly investigating the charges.
At the same time, the office of the CEO, Retan U Kelkar, on 8 August issued a clarification regarding allegations made by Sunil Kumar.
The CEO stated that as part of the Special Summary Revision conducted ahead of the 2024 Lok Sabha polls, the draft electoral roll was published on 27 October 2023, and copies were given free of cost to all recognised political parties.
Between 27 October and 9 December 2023, the Thrissur Lok Sabha constituency received 45,924 Form-6 applications (inclusion of names), of which 42,807 were accepted and 3,117 rejected. During the same period, 25,194 Form-7 applications (deletion of names) were received, with 24,472 accepted and 722 rejected.
Additionally, 14,068 Form-8 applications (corrections) were received, of which 13,264 were accepted and 804 rejected.
The Electoral Registration Officers (EROs) examined and disposed of all claims and objections submitted within the stipulated period. The final electoral roll was published on 22 January 2024, with copies again provided to all recognised political parties.
The CEO said that the actions taken by the EROs were displayed on notice boards and the CEO’s website every week, and the information was shared in meetings with political party representatives and publicised through the media. No appeals were received by the District Election Officer (DEO) against the EROs’ decisions during this phase.
Following the publication of the final roll, continuous updation continued until the deadline for the 2024 general elections. From 10 December 2023 to 25 March 2024, the constituency received 73,731 Form-6 applications, with 67,670 accepted and 6,061 rejected. Between 10 December 2023 and 16 March 2024, there were 25,264 Form-7 applications, of which 22,061 were accepted and 3,203 rejected. In the same period, 26,948 Form-8 applications were received, with 25,351 accepted and 1,597 rejected.
The final electoral roll for the 2024 Lok Sabha elections was published on 4 April 2024. Again, no appeals regarding the EROs’ actions were received by the DEO. Copies of the updated roll were given free to all recognised political parties.
The CEO emphasised that the preparation of the Thrissur electoral roll strictly followed the Registration of Electors Rules, 1960, and the Election Commission of India’s instructions, within the prescribed timelines. Meetings under the DEO’s chairmanship were held at every stage, with participation from the Electoral Roll Observer, EROs, and authorised political party representatives. Booth-level meetings involving Booth Level Officers (BLOs) and Booth Level Agents (BLAs) were also conducted.
During the elections, contact numbers for the General Observer, Police Observer, and Expenditure Observer appointed by the Election Commission were made public and shared with political parties. Meetings with political party representatives and candidates’ agents were held under the Observers’ chairmanship. At no stage, the CEO noted, were complaints raised about the voters’ list.
He further stated that in the post-poll scrutiny meeting chaired by the General Observer, neither the candidate nor his election agent raised any such concerns. Any objections to the election process, the CEO added, should have been taken to the High Court through an election petition within the legally prescribed timeframe.
Meanwhile, similar to the case of Rahul Gandhi, the Election Commission on 10 August demanded an affidavit under oath from Sunil Kumar to support his claims.
Kelkar also condemned the remarks against the former District Election Officer, Thrissur, and stated that ‘all election officials perform their duties with impartiality, diligence and in strict compliance with the electoral laws and instructions of the ECI.’
The District Election Officer (DEO), Thrissur, on 10 August, stated that on 25 March 2024, KP Rajendran, LDF Thrissur Parliamentary Constituency Central Election Committee general secretary, complained about alleged fake voters in the continuous revision of the electoral roll.
The then DEO acted immediately, directing all Electoral Registration Officers to thoroughly verify forms.
A reply on 26 March confirmed the complaint was addressed, with details available on the CEO Kerala website, and sought any further specific complaints.
The final roll for the 2024 General Election was published on 4 April, with no objections raised in official meetings.
Specific complaints from the LDF Booth Level Agent in Booth No. 30, 067 Thrissur LAC, and Rajendran as Chief Election Agent, were received only on 24 and 25 April, just before the 26 April poll. The DEO ordered an immediate probe, and absent/shifted/dead voters were listed in the ASD (Absentee, Shifted or Dead) list.
On polling day, Rajendran alleged that ineligible voters cast votes in Booth No. 30.
An inquiry involving the complainant, Booth Level Officer, and Presiding Officer found all such voters were in the booth’s roll and not on the ASD list. The Presiding Officer’s decision was upheld, and Rajendran was informed on 28 May. No other polling agents raised objections on polling day.
All political parties and agents were kept informed throughout the roll revision process, and concerns were addressed in time.
Alappuzha, the home turf of AICC general secretary and MP KC Venugopal, has emerged as a flashpoint in Kerala’s intensifying debate over “vote chori”.
The Congress and CPI(M) have both accused the BJP of engineering duplicate and fake entries, accusing it of renting houses, shifting loyal families, and exploiting community vote banks to gain an edge in closely contested constituencies.
The controversy flared on 10 August when Venugopal announced that the Congress would launch a comprehensive audit of alleged irregularities in voter lists across 48 constituencies where INDIA bloc candidates lost by fewer than 50,000 votes.
Speaking in Alappuzha, he claimed fake voters were included in Kerala’s rolls, citing Alappuzha and Thrissur as prime examples.
In Alappuzha, Venugopal narrowly reclaimed the seat with 4,04,560 votes (38.21%), defeating CPI(M)’s incumbent AM Ariff, who secured 3,41,047 votes (32.21%).
BJP’s Sobha Surendran came a close third with 2,99,648 votes (28.3%) — a performance reflecting the saffron party’s rising graph in the constituency.
However, CPI(M) Alappuzha district secretary Nazar Raghavan told South First that the BJP has long engaged in adding “duplicate votes,” a practice allegedly seen even in local body polls.
According to him, the party rented vacant NRI-owned houses or flats in its strongholds, moved in affiliated families, obtained residential certificates, and then added them to the voter list.
“This existed well before Rahul Gandhi’s allegations. In 2024, they combined it with caste-based consolidation, particularly among Dheevara and Ezhava communities,” Raghavan said, pointing to an 8–10% vote share surge for the BJP in Kayamkulam and Haripad. Sobha Surendran’s presence, he added, helped woo women voters and consolidate Ezhava support.
KPCC member and former Alappuzha DCC chief AA Shukkoor alleged that the BJP not only relocated loyal families but also brought in relatives and friends from other constituencies to vote twice — once at home and again in their “temporary” constituency.
He accused both the BJP and CPI(M) of registering voters at their party office addresses, but claimed the Congress did not engage in such practices. “The only solution is a digital voters’ list. What the EC gave to Rahul-ji was a hard copy, which caused huge delays,” Shukkoor said, recalling a similar fraud fight in Attingal in 2019 that led to the deletion of nearly one lakh names after a court battle.
Shukkoor explained that booth agents can only detect duplicate votes within the same booth.
“They can object if something looks suspicious, but election officers usually allow the vote if the name is on the list. Agents don’t have access to the entire constituency’s data,” he said.
He flagged a sharp BJP vote share rise in Ambalapuzha, Kayamkulam, and Karunagappalli as “highly suspicious” and likely the result of malpractice.
Despite Venugopal’s strong words, local Congress units have shown limited urgency.
Alappuzha DCC chief Babu Prasad said he had data on the fraud but was “too busy” with preparations for adding names to the voters’ list ahead of local body elections.
The constituency — comprising Aroor, Cherthala, Alappuzha, Ambalappuzha, Haripad, Kayamkulam, and Karunagappally — is demographically diverse, with Ezhavas, Nairs, Dheevaras, SC communities, Muslims, and Latin Catholics shaping voting patterns.
While the CPI(M) dominates most segments, Congress has pockets of strength in Haripad and Karunagappally, and the BJP is steadily expanding its footprint.
As charges fly and denials harden, the state now stands at a crossroads. The clash now goes beyond party politics — it’s a test of public faith in the very machinery of Indian democracy.
(Edited by Majnu Babu).
