The Uttar Pradesh Chief Electoral Officer has publicly rebutted Mohammed Zubair’s allegation that the Election Commission issued multiple voter ID cards to an individual after receiving just two applications for inclusion in the electoral roll.
Zubair had claimed that several voters whose names were missing from the draft electoral roll published on January 6 had submitted Form 6 for inclusion. In some cases, he alleged, two applications were submitted for the same individual, but the Commission issued four Electoral Photo Identity Cards (EPICs).
Mocking the alleged discrepancy, Zubair described the process as a “Buy one get one free” scheme.
Responding to the post, the UP CEO said the claim was factually incorrect and challenged Zubair to verify his information before making allegations against the Election Commission.
“Mr Fact-checker please fact-check your own facts,” the CEO said, asserting that the individual in the case cited by Zubair had submitted four applications, not two.
Mr Fact-checker please fact-check your own facts.
There is no such scheme as “Buy one Get one free” scheme by Election Commission.
As per your post, the voter had submitted only two applications and he got 4 EPIC cards.This statement is false.
The voter had submitted 4 applications.
If you want to dispute our facts then you post the reference numbers of two applications that you claim he had submitted and we will post the reference number of the remaining two.
The problem of generation of multiple EPICs on submission of multiple forms of an individual is a long standing one. We do deduplication through ECINET periodically. We are on path to achieving the objective of catching multiple forms submitted by an individual at the submission stage only. We will achieve our objective very soon.
Please do not incite people by making patently false statements about ECI and thereby trying to create disaffection among the citizens towards a Constitutional Body.
You are advised to rectify your mistake by amending or deleting your post after completing your own due diligence now that you have been informed by us about your wrong information.
— CEO Uttar Pradesh (@ceoup) October 17, 2026
CEO offers to publish application reference numbers
The UP CEO directly challenged Zubair to substantiate his claim, offering to publish the reference numbers of the remaining applications if Zubair shared the references for the two applications he alleged had been submitted.
The official maintained that the claim of four EPIC cards being issued against just two applications was false because the voter had submitted four applications.
The response also questioned the use of the “Buy one, get one free” phrase, arguing that the description misrepresented the circumstances of the case.
ECI acknowledges multiple EPICs as a long-standing challenge
While rejecting Zubair’s account of the specific case, the UP CEO acknowledged that the generation of multiple EPICs when an individual submits multiple applications has been a long-standing problem.
The official said the Election Commission periodically carries out deduplication through ECINET, its digital platform, to identify and address such cases.
The CEO added that the Commission was working towards identifying duplicate applications at the submission stage itself, rather than relying solely on subsequent checks.
“We are on path to achieving the objective of catching multiple forms submitted by an individual at the submission stage only. We will achieve our objective very soon,” the official said.
The acknowledgement indicates that the Commission is aware of the challenge posed by duplicate applications and is working to strengthen its processes. However, the CEO’s response did not provide an overall count of duplicate EPIC cases or details of how many had been resolved through deduplication.
CEO urges Zubair to correct his post
The UP CEO also cautioned against making claims that could undermine public confidence in the Election Commission, a constitutional body responsible for conducting elections.
The official urged Zubair not to circulate what the CEO described as patently false information or make statements that could create disaffection among citizens towards the Commission.
The CEO further advised Zubair to amend or delete his post after conducting due diligence, stating that the official clarification had already brought the factual error to his attention.
