Before Delhi’s massive Special Intensive Revision exercise brought millions of voter records under scrutiny, nearly 11 lakh names had reportedly already been removed from the capital’s electoral rolls.
The deletions occurred between January 2025 and June 2026, according to recent reports based on election data. The timing has become the centre of controversy because many affected voters reportedly did not know their names had been removed until the SIR process began.
The SIR exercise was launched to comprehensively update and verify electoral rolls. Booth Level Officers conducted enumeration, distributed forms and collected voter information as part of the large-scale revision.
But for citizens whose names had disappeared before the exercise started, the process could become significantly more complicated.
Normally, an existing voter would expect to receive an Enumeration Form through the revision process. However, if the person’s name was no longer in the electoral database, the form might not be generated through the normal process.
This reportedly left some voters in an unusual situation: their family members could participate in the enumeration process, while they themselves were effectively missing from the system.
The difference between being removed during SIR and being removed before SIR is therefore important.
A voter excluded during a revision exercise may be able to understand the reason for exclusion and use the claims-and-objections process. But a person whose name disappeared months earlier may first have to discover that the deletion happened at all.
Election authorities routinely revise electoral rolls to maintain accuracy. People die, change addresses and sometimes register more than once. Removing incorrect entries is therefore a necessary part of maintaining a credible electoral system.
The Election Commission has stated that the objective of the SIR process is to ensure electoral rolls remain accurate, updated and free of ineligible or duplicate entries while ensuring that eligible electors are protected.
However, the nearly 11 lakh pre-SIR deletions have raised questions about the mechanisms used in routine revision.
Were all affected voters properly notified? Were verification procedures sufficient? How easily can an eligible citizen discover and correct an incorrect deletion?
These questions have become more urgent because Delhi’s overall voter-roll revision has produced enormous changes.
The draft SIR roll showed approximately 97.53 lakh electors compared with around 1.45 crore voters before the exercise, meaning nearly one-third of the earlier electorate was not included in the draft list. Authorities have cited categories such as permanently shifted, absent, deceased and duplicate voters as major reasons for exclusion.
The nearly 11 lakh deletions before SIR add another layer to this story.
They show that Delhi’s electoral rolls were already changing significantly before the intensive revision formally began.
For democracy, accurate voter lists are essential. An inflated or outdated list can create serious problems. At the same time, an eligible voter wrongly excluded from the list faces the possibility of losing access to the ballot.
That is why electoral administration requires a careful balance between removing incorrect entries and protecting legitimate voters.
The Delhi controversy may ultimately encourage stronger systems for public notification and voter verification.
Citizens too may need to become more proactive. Checking electoral status periodically could become increasingly important, especially before elections.
The disappearance of nearly 11 lakh names before SIR is therefore not merely an administrative statistic. It is a reminder that democracy depends on accurate records—and equally on ensuring that citizens know when those records change.
Journalist Details
- Jitendra Kumar is an Indian journalist and social activist from Hathras in Uttar Pradesh is known as the senior journalist and founder of Xpert Times Network Private Limited.
Latest entries
