Key Points
Commissioners Sandhu and Joshi raised at least 14 formal objections over the past 10 months about how the SIR exercise has been conducted, alleging some decisions were made without their knowledge.
The SIR exercise has led to the deletion of 13.37 crore names from draft electoral rolls, a 14.1% decline, with Delhi recording the highest deletion rate at 32.8%.
Concerns range from an unauthorized change to Form 6, to the ECINET platform's centralization of voter database control, to specific cases in Goa and West Bengal where voter restorations were reportedly mishandled.
THE SPECIAL INTENSIVE REVISION (SIR) exercise has been encased in controversy since its implementation. The revision exercise, undertaken by the Election Commission of India (ECI), involves the verification and update of the electoral poll list through door-to-door enumeration. So far, over 13 crores voters’ names have been struck from draft electoral rolls across 30 states and Union Territories, with the rationale given being “logistical discrepancies” among others Now, a recent Indian Express investigation has revealed that even the Election Commission is experiencing internal dissent about the SIR exercise and how its being conducted, bringing focus towards the sustained differences within the poll panel over the process.
The Election Commission is a three-member collegiate body consisting of the Chief Election Commissioner (CEC) and two other Election Commissioners. Currently, it consists of CEC Gyanesh Kumar, alongside ECs Dr. Sukhbir Singh Sandhu and Dr. Vivek Joshi
Under Article 324 of the Constitution and the Chief Election Commissioner and Other Election Commissioners Act, 2023, the Election Commission operates as a collective entity, and decisions are made unanimously and a majority decision is followed when commissioners disagree over an issue.
According to the Indian Express report, Election Commissioners Sukhbir Singh Sandhu and Vivek Joshi raised formal objections at least 14 times over the past 10 months regarding decisions associated with the SIR exercise. They alleged that several key actions were taken without their knowledge or consent despite them expressing their concerns numerous times in writing.
The objections, documented in official communications and also shared with the Chief Election Commissioner (CEC) Gyanesh Kumar, express concerns about various aspects of the revision exercise, including voter registration, deletion and restoration of names, appeals submitted during the SIR exercise and access to the electoral roll database.
The SIR exercise was first launched in Bihar in June 2025 before being extended to other parts of the country. Data released by the Election Commission earlier in September 2026 showed that 13.37 crore names had been removed from draft electoral rolls so far, a decline of around 14.1 per cent compared with voter lists prepared before the SIR. Delhi reported the highest rate of deletions at 32.8 per cent, followed by Dadra and Nagar Haveli and Daman and Diu, Telangana, and Maharashtra.
A major disagreement within the EC centers on Form 6, which is used by individuals applying for inclusion in the electoral rolls for the first time. According to the Indian Express report, a new question for first-time voters was added to the form this year, asking applicants whether they, their parents or grandparents had appeared on electoral rolls prepared during the previous SIR. The report said Joshi had warned in May 2026 that such a change could not be introduced without an amendment to the electoral rules, a concern also backed by Sandhu.
Despite the objection, the change was introduced without Sandhu being formally intimated of the same. The election commissioner subsequently termed the decision as “unauthorized and illegal” and called for the question to be removed immediately.
In January 2026, the ECI launched the ECINET digital platform to streamline all election-related processes such as voter registration, tracking applications, and checking candidate profiles. Within months of its launch, both Joshi and Sandhu expressed doubts over how the program was working and how electoral roll data was being managed.
As per law, local election officials, known as, Electoral Registration Officers (EROs), are the ones who decide whether a voter’s name should be added, deleted, or corrected on the electoral poll list. With the introduction of the ECINET platform, this process is now done online. However, they could only do this if the program allowed them to do so. The ECINET program is run by the Information Technology Department of the Commission in Delhi, under the guidance of Director General Dr. Seema Khanna. Which means that the IT department has the power to allow or prevent an ERO from updating the electoral roll list.
According to the report, Joshi cautioned against the “gradual centralization” of the voter database and called for an audit to verify that only legally authorized officials, including EROs, could modify the data. Sandhu later raised similar concerns, alleging that election officials at the state level were not being given complete access to the ECINET portal used to maintain electoral rolls.
See also: “Existing Rolls Thrown in Dustbin”: Ex-CEC Quraishi Questions Rush Behind ECI’s SIR Exercise
In Goa, the commissioners pointed to a case wherein 97 voters, who were declared eligible by EROs, were reportedly excluded from the final electoral roll list because the ECINET software did not allow to reverse previous deletions.
The commissioners also raised questions about appeals filed in West Bengal after judicial officers restored several voters’ names to the rolls. Sandhu reportedly asked for clarification about who had approved the appeals and under what authority they had been filed on behalf of the Election Commission.
The developments come as the SIR exercise is already under judicial examination. On September 22, 2026, the Supreme Court asked the Election Commission to explain notices sent to voters based on alleged “logical discrepancies” and raised concerns over notices that it described as having been generated mechanically.
The Indian Express report revealed that both Sandhu and Joshi had repeatedly written to concerned officials to ask about these issues. Even though their concerns were recorded, they were never addressed.
(Edited by Harsh Pandey)
Suggested reading:
Subscribe to our channels on YouTube and WhatsApp
Download our app on Play Store