Is It Respected 'SIR' or Stupid Idiot

The CJP and the affiliate brigade is back again with another issue, bit angry and in protest mode. I don’t know what’s going on and what make people angry because I am a bit dumb. But something serious is unfolding or happened already from the way things have irritated the young folks yet again. Similar to couple of occasions earlier, I once again resonate to their cause nevertheless. I recently returned from abroad and don’t know much about SIR. But one thing which pains me is my vote has been deleted from the rolls much before the previous elections. I have been residing at the same location for more than 13 years and never moved to another address or never registered to vote anywhere else. It is a puzzle why a valid, legal citizen of a country has to go through this exercise and fight for his right to vote. Before deleting, did they verified I am dead, I am not. Did they verified I changed my residence. I haven’t. Did they verified duplicate entries. There aren’t. Did they verified non-existent or invalid addresses. There isn’t. Did I applied for voluntary deletion. I haven’t. Did they corrected the data. The data isn’t wrong in first place. When there is no reason to delete, just for the sake of it, I don’t know why anyone can give authority to delete my name. It enrages me, more so when there are 100 verifications to register as a voter and go through this SIR but for deletion – the simple whims and fancies of who knows who will suffice. I am a non-existant in the Indian electoral rolls. I need to beg to prove that I am an Indian in India. Who gave the right for voter deletion without the consent of the voter. It certainly enrages any victim. And there are crores and crores of such victims across the nation. The Election Commission of India (ECI) has not yet released a consolidated national total, but state‑level data compiled from CEO offices and internal reports indicate roughly 6–7 crore deletions between October 2025 and August 2026. Independent analyses by election‑data researchers (e.g., ADR and Lokniti‑CSDS) estimate 8–9 crore deletions nationwide, with Telangana, Maharashtra, and Uttar Pradesh showing the highest ratios of flagged entries. The Congress and Cockroach Janta Party (CJP) allege that the SIR process deleted or flagged over 12 crore voters, disproportionately affecting young and urban voters.

I had submitted my form-6 to register as a new voter now. It has been two months now and the file hasn’t moved. After doing mutliple follow-ups, I am being questioned as some wrong doer now – as in why my vote was deleted earlier and why am I applying to register now. I submitted a grievance and it wasn’t answered as well. This is the over-complicated treatment for valid, legal and true citizens of the nation to prove their citizenship to vote. With the same struggle, I might try as hard to prove my citizenship (even though I am not) and become eligible to vote in America. You can understand if you are being checked for illegal immigrant, temporary migrant worker, non-citizen or any other invalid category. But removing the true citizens of the land by over-complicating the rules was a questionable practise. Another personal incident from this SIR exercise - My brother’s name was also removed from the electoral roll during enumeration verification process this month because he didn’t answer the phone call. He didn’t receive the phone call in first place. So, this is how silly the deletion process is. He is a registered voter and never changed place, never lived out-of-station and a true localite. If this person was given such a treatment and made to come from step-1 to register all over again, you can tell how sanctimonious this exercise is all over the nation. There is such a story in every other household. When the electoral results gets decided by tens, hundreds and few thousands of margins, removing crores of legal votes in the name of preventing fraud is biggest fraud.  

Now let us see what this SIR enumeration looks like - for an existing voter, SIR can mean receiving a preprinted form, checking details, searching an old electoral roll for their own or a parent’s entry, recording constituency and serial numbers, submitting the form, and keeping an acknowledgement. Then comes the draft roll check. A mismatch may bring a notice, requests for birth or family documents, and a hearing. If omitted, the voter must file a claim and check the final roll. New voters must submit Form 6, a declaration, and supporting papers before verification. What appears to be one form can become weeks of searching, repeated visits, and anxious follow-up. What should be a computer software check using data search to remove duplicates, add new and prevent fraud has taken a toll on resources and consumed significant time to generate an incomplete outcome. From a friend, the individual experience is long winding as well to complete the umpteen steps using forms and paper documents. For an uneducated, its hellscape or better escape. It is a serious misstep to carry out this exercise nationwide in present form and expect a perfect result. You can allow 100 invalid votes but cannot delete one valid vote. By this system of severe guardrails, they might won by not rigging an election but lost at overseeing a fair election with complete electorate. In the age of big data, huge data processing, AI and Aadhar, removing duplicates and fraud should be done easily if there is will.

A voter list can become shorter while democracy becomes weaker. Removing dead or duplicate entries serves a legitimate purpose. Removing eligible citizens, obstructing their restoration and then celebrating administrative efficiency defeats that purpose. Where those failures are documented, “administrative stupidity” is a fair description of the decisions. The public deserves an explanation of how such failures were allowed.

Consider the scale. Figures reported on September 1 recorded 13.37 crore names excluded from draft rolls across 30 states and Union Territories: 14.1% of the earlier electorate. Delhi’s exclusion rate reached 32.8%, Telangana’s 21.7% and Maharashtra’s 21.1%. These are draft exclusions, not 13.37 crore proven wrongful deletions. Nevertheless, transferring the burden of correction to millions demands exceptional safeguards and independently verifiable results.

The evidence of reversals is substantial. Figures from an Election Commission affidavit’s annexure showed Bengal tribunals restoring 1,13,943 names out of 1,22,592 decided cases, approximately 93%. That identifies a large group whose exclusions were reversed; it does not establish a national error rate. Officials cautioned that stronger documentary cases were decided first. Even with that qualification, the restoration count demands investigation of the original decisions. 

Timing makes the failure more serious. By September, 22.21 lakh appeals sought reversal of Bengal’s 27.16 lakh adjudication deletions. Only 1,607 electors had been restored before polling. The right to appeal offers inadequate protection when the election finishes before the remedy arrives. A restored entry cannot retrospectively cast a ballot.

Goa supplies an especially stark example. Reported official correspondence identified 97 voters whom electoral officers had examined and found eligible. Eight communications in seven days sought the software permission needed to restore them. Their names remained absent when the final roll appeared, and reportedly remained missing in September. Citizens completed verification; the administration failed to implement its own findings. Calling that merely an inconvenience insults the people affected.

Institutional accountability is also disputed. Investigative reporting in Indian Express, which caused the recent outburst from public, documented fourteen objections over ten months from two Election Commissioners concerning registration, deletions and electoral data. The Commission says these were administrative inputs during drafting and that final decisions were unanimous. Publish the relevant records and establish which account the authorisations support. Confidence requires an answer that citizens can examine.

The corrective programme should be immediate: investigate disputed exclusions, provide intelligible reasons, verify delivery of notices, resolve claims before voting deadlines and restore eligible applicants promptly. Publish processing times, reversal rates and independent audit findings. Give field officers adequate staff and functioning correction powers. Genuine dedication means protecting electoral participation throughout verification, including for citizens who cannot navigate complicated paperwork.

CJP’s anger is justified where these documented failures injure eligible voters. Allegations of stolen elections demand a major independent investigation, although deletion totals or narrow victory margins alone cannot prove theft. My verdict is that SIR’s implementation shows serious administrative stupidity and governance failure. Whether it also involved deliberate manipulation must be established through evidence. Answer the allegations. Protect the voter.