Full Breakdown
Election Commission’s Special Intensive Revision Faces Claims of Internal Dissent and Legal Scrutiny
By Drooid · · How we work
SIR Controversy Sparks Claims of Internal Dissent
The Election Commission of India (EC) has been accused of internal disagreement over its nationwide Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls. An investigative report alleged that Election Commissioners Sukhbir Singh Sandhu and Vivek Joshi recorded formal objections to SIR-related decisions on at least 14 occasions during the preceding ten months, including four objections on a single day. The report said the two commissioners flagged changes to Form 6, centralisation of the voter-database system, and the handling of deletion and restoration appeals.
Background: How the SIR Works
The SIR, launched in Bihar in 2025 and extended to 30 states and Union Territories, aims to remove ineligible, deceased or duplicate voters while ensuring no eligible citizen is omitted. It relies on a centralised ECINET software that cross-checks current entries against the previous intensive revision. Discrepancies are categorised as “logical discrepancies” or “no-mapping” with the prior roll. Notices are generated for electors whose records fall into these categories, after which they may submit supporting documents to the designated Electoral Registration Officer (ERO) or Booth Level Officer (BLO).
Data & Statistics
- Over 13 crore names have been deleted from draft rolls nationwide.
- In Delhi, the draft roll published on 31 August 2026 listed 33.1 lakh electors flagged for verification; 31.63 lakh notices have been issued.
- The Supreme Court was told that 22.21 lakh electors whose names were deleted in West Bengal have filed appeals, about 82 % of the 27.16 lakh deletions.
- The EC disclosed that 16.10 lakh appeals sought removal of voters already retained on the roll, about 2.5 % of the 6.45 crore electors on the final roll published on 28 February 2026.
Official Statements & Responses
Sources noted that the law and a Supreme Court judgment require decisions to be taken unanimously wherever possible, with majority rule applied only when unanimity cannot be reached. The Supreme Court bench headed by Chief Justice Surya Kant asked the EC to clarify the meaning of “logical discrepancy” and to ensure that notices enable voters to respond effectively.
Criticism & Opposition
Opposition leaders have characterised the SIR as a threat to democratic fairness. Manish Tewari warned that “if rules were not allegedly followed and decisions were taken that were not unanimous or by majority, then all the decisions of ECI are per se arbitrary and capricious if not completely illegal.”
Mallikarjun Kharge, Congress president, questioned the creation of a “VIP/marked electors” category, asking “on what basis was their voting right stripped away?”
Conflicting Reports & Gaps
The Indian Express investigation cited Suvendu Adhikari (Chief Minister of West Bengal) as stating that only 7 lakh of the 27 lakh deleted voters had filed appeals. The EC’s submission to the Supreme Court, however, records 22.21 lakh appeals, a discrepancy that has not been reconciled publicly.
What’s Next
- The EC must file a status report on the clarification of “logical discrepancy” by 29 October.
- Electors with notices have until 30 October to file claims and objections.
- The final Delhi electoral roll will be published on 4 November.
These developments place the EC’s procedural transparency and internal cohesion under judicial and political scrutiny as the nation approaches upcoming municipal elections.