Electoral Roll Revisions and Transparency Pose Challenges for Election Commission

Past Lessons

When India prepared its first electoral roll, nearly 28 lakh women were left off because they were identified through male relatives rather than their own names. Sukumar Sen, the country's first Chief Election Commissioner, worked to fix this, and by 1957, about 85% of those affected were registered under their own names.

Current Roll Revisions

That lesson matters as the Election Commission of India undertakes its Special Intensive Revision of electoral rolls. In Bihar, around 65 lakh names were missing from the draft roll published in August 2025, with the Commission citing deaths, migration and duplicate entries. The Supreme Court directed the ECI to publish the list of excluded voters along with the reasons for exclusion. In West Bengal, more than 27 lakh names were deleted during checks, leading to about 22 lakh appeals. Tribunal judges pointed out technical issues with the appeals portal, such as trouble issuing notices and restoring names. A remedy that comes too late results in a lost vote.

Deletions and Data

The same care applies to Form 7, which lets voters ask to delete a name from the roll. In Aland, Karnataka, 6,018 online applications sought deletions. The ECI rejected 5,994 as incorrect and accepted 24 after checks, leading to an inquiry and an FIR. Every deletion request should leave a clear record of the applicant and supporting evidence. Transparency in polling data is another test. In Maharashtra's 2024 Assembly election, turnout rose from 58.22% at 5 p.m. to 66.05% in the final figure. The Commission stated that the earlier number was provisional while records were checked. After a court order in a Haryana election case, the government amended Rule 93 of the Conduct of Elections Rules, raising public concerns about access to electronic records like CCTV footage.

Context

Institutional independence remains vital for public trust in election oversight. In Anoop Baranwal versus Union of India in 2023, the Supreme Court set up an interim selection committee involving the Prime Minister, the Leader of the Opposition and the Chief Justice of India. Parliament later replaced the Chief Justice with a Union Cabinet Minister, leaving the government in control of two of the three selection seats.