As the nation looks towards the 2029 polls, the Election Commission of India faces an unusually grave credibility crisis over the Special Intensive Revision of electoral rolls. What was presented as a routine clean-up has become a confrontation over the legality of voter deletions, the authority of the Chief Election Commissioner and the transparency of decisions that determine who can participate in democracy. Former Union home secretary, BJP minister and MP R.K. Singh has accused Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar and the ECI of violating electoral law. In an open letter, Singh argued that the nationwide revision was contrary to Section 21 of the Representation of the People Act, 1950, which, according to him, permits special revisions only in specific constituencies or parts of constituencies, with reasons recorded in writing. His central question is difficult to dismiss: can an exception meant for special cases be turned into a national rule? Singh has also challenged the use of revised rolls while appeals against deletions remain pending. In his view, the rolls existing when the revision was notified should continue until the process, including appeals, is complete. He further alleges that names were removed without the inquiry and opportunity to respond required under Section 22, which assigns the Electoral Registration Officer responsibility for such action.The controversy deepens over Form 6, used by new voters. An added requirement reportedly asks applicants to establish whether they or their parents or grandparents appear in the electoral roll from the last revision. The source says this change was made despite warnings from Election Commissioners Sukhbir Singh Sandhu and Vivek Joshi that Form 6 could not be altered in this manner without an amendment to the rules. For young citizens, being asked to locate old electoral records may create a needless barrier to registration.The scale of the exercise makes these concerns more alarming. The revision, begun in Bihar in June 2025 and following that it has reportedly removed more than 13 crore names from draft rolls across 30 States and Union Territories. Meanwhile, Sandhu and Joshi are said to have objected on record at least 14 times in 10 months, alleging that decisions and orders were issued without their knowledge. They also warned against centralising access to voter databases in Delhi while bypassing state officials.This is not merely another political dispute between the Opposition and the ruling BJP. The deeper issue is whether the commission followed the law, respected its own internal safeguards and protected every eligible voter’s opportunity to be heard. The rejected impeachment notices against Kumar, submitted by Opposition MPs and turned down by the Lok Sabha Speaker and Rajya Sabha Chairman, do not settle those questions. Nor does political defence of the CEC erase the dissent recorded within the commission itself. The right to vote cannot depend on opaque paperwork, shifting instructions or unresolved institutional disagreements. Electoral housekeeping becomes democratic damage when due process is treated as an inconvenience in any democracy. An election authority must be trusted not only when it announces results but also when it decides who may vote. Unless the ECI answers these allegations openly, restores confidence in its procedures and ensures that no eligible voter is silently excluded, the revision will remain a shadow over India’s 2029 elections.
The post Ire Over SIR Grows first appeared on Nagaland Post.