India has not carried out a nationwide intensive revision of its electoral rolls for almost twenty years, relying instead on annual and pre‑election summary updates that add or delete names from existing rolls. A recent investigation by The Indian Express has highlighted that even within the Election Commission, officials have raised concerns about the current system.
In late September, Commissioners Sukhbir Singh Sandhu and Vivek Joshi lodged at least fourteen formal objections over ten months on matters ranging from voter registration, deletion and restoration to appeals and access to electoral‑roll data. The objections touched on changes to voter forms, the gradual centralisation of the database and the use of the SIR algorithm to flag discrepancies. The Commission said differing views are normal in a multi‑member body and that all final decisions were unanimous.
The practical impact of these disputes is evident in Delhi’s Badarpur constituency, where about 87,000 electors—44 per cent of the electorate—received notices after their details could not be linked to the 2002 roll. In Manipur, 737 Meitei voters in Churachandpur were reported missing from the draft roll, while Nagaland’s 2026 revision left 36.64 per cent of electors in “no‑mapping” or “mapping anomaly” categories. These cases illustrate how a central database can flag mismatches that require human verification.
The Supreme Court has already questioned the mechanical issuance of notices, asking the Commission to refine the tool and increase transparency. The Court’s intervention underscores that while technology can identify potential errors, the final decision must involve human scrutiny and clear communication to voters. The debate now centres on whether the electoral roll system can provide a transparent, verifiable process that protects both the integrity of the electorate and the rights of individual voters.
