A newly released booklet by Vote for Democracy (VFD) and Citizens for Justice and Peace (CJP) has raised serious concerns about the ongoing Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls, describing it as a process that is increasingly exclusionary, opaque, and burdensome for ordinary voters.
Titled “Inside the Special Intensive Revision (SIR)”, the publication is positioned not only as a training manual to help citizens navigate the process, but also as an investigative and ground-based documentation of how the exercise is unfolding across states.
Drawing from field experiences in states such as West Bengal, Assam, Uttar Pradesh, Tamil Nadu, and Gujarat, the booklet argues that what is officially framed as a routine administrative revision has, in practice, become a site of widespread anxiety and potential disenfranchisement.
A handbook born out of crisis
The booklet explicitly states that it does not endorse the current SIR process. Instead, it frames itself as a defensive tool for citizens, aimed at helping them “navigate a hitherto unconstitutional hurdle” while documenting systemic irregularities.
It combines:
- Step-by-step guidance on procedures such as notices, hearings, and appeals
- Legal explanations of voter rights
- Ground reports and case studies
- Analysis of administrative and technological failures
This dual character—as both manual and critique—sets it apart from conventional reports. Most critically, it provides both procedural and factual information that can assist individuals and community workers who may navigate this process in states that have until now not undergone the SIR.
So far only 2003 Guidelines for a Special Intensive Revision (SIR)—the last such conducted –are available. The exercise started by controversial and sudden notifications in Bihar in June 2025 and thereafter in West Bengal, Uttar Pradesh, Gujarat and Tamil Nadu was based on periodic notifications –often then corrected by the Supreme Court of India (in ongoing cases). The Election Commission of India (ECI) has so far, not thought it fit to release any fresh set of guidelines.
Departure from earlier electoral revisions
A key argument advanced in the booklet is that the present SIR marks a significant departure from the last such exercise conducted in 2003.
According to the publication:
- The 2003 process was spread over six months and relied on existing electoral rolls and voter ID cards (EPIC)
- The current exercise is being conducted under compressed timelines, often close to elections
- Voters are now required to produce legacy data from 2002–2004 rolls, even if already registered
The booklet notes that such changes have shifted the process from one of facilitation to verification-heavy scrutiny.
The burden of legacy documentation
One of the central concerns highlighted is the present requirement (in the ongoing exercise in some of the abovementioned states) to trace names in decades-old electoral rolls (2002-2004).
For individuals:
- Born before 1987, locating their names in the 2002–2004 rolls is critical
- Born after 1987, the burden extends to tracing parental records
The booklet points out that these rolls have so far been poorly digitised, difficult to access, and available only in fragmented formats, making the process particularly challenging for marginalised groups.
Step by step, the Manual also guides the user on how to approach the process, understand the pressures on the administrative staff of the ECI (there have been several BLO deaths in other states due to unrealistic deadlines and pressures) and calmly insist of signatures and records of any details. Forms or documents submit. Most crucially of all, it advises the citizenry to interact with field and other officials of the SECs in different states and push for a voter-friendly, communicative and inclusive approach whenever the process is launched there.
Technology and “mechanical disenfranchisement”
The publication repeatedly uses the phrase “mechanical disenfranchisement” to describe the impact of digital systems deployed in the SIR.
It documents several recurring issues:
- Automated mapping of current voters with archival data
- Translation and transliteration errors across languages
- Algorithmic flags based on perceived “logical discrepancies”
These include mismatches in:
- Names
- Parentage
- Age gaps within families
According to the booklet, such discrepancies often arise from software limitations rather than actual ineligibility, yet they trigger notices and verification procedures.
Notices, hearings, and procedural pressure
The booklet provides detailed guidance on navigating SIR notices and hearings, while also documenting systemic challenges.
It notes that:
- Notices are issued to voters whose records cannot be “matched”
- Individuals must attend hearings to establish their eligibility
- The burden of proof lies heavily on the elector
The publication emphasises that these hearings are often conducted under tight timelines and administrative pressure, creating barriers for those unable to access documents quickly.
Misuse of Form 7 and objection process
Another area of concern is the alleged misuse of Form 7, which allows objections to the inclusion of a voter’s name.
The booklet documents instances of:
- Multiple objections filed against large numbers of voters
- Signatures appearing in inconsistent languages
- Individuals denying having filed objections in their own name
- Cases where even deceased persons were listed as objectors
It warns that such practices can convert a procedural safeguard into a tool for targeted exclusion.
Human Impact: Stress, Fear, and Administrative Pressure
Beyond procedural issues, the booklet records a significant human dimension to the SIR process.
Ground accounts point to:
- Anxiety among voters over possible deletion from rolls
- Difficulties faced by elderly individuals and daily wage workers
- Administrative pressure on Booth Level Officers (BLOs), who are required to meet strict targets
The publication also references instances of suicides linked to stress, both among voters and BLOs, underscoring the intensity of the situation on the ground.
Legal awareness and citizen response
A substantial portion of the booklet is devoted to legal literacy, outlining:
- The roles of electoral authorities such as BLOs, EROs, and District Election Officers
- The process for filing claims, objections, and appeals
- The right to a hearing and the principle of natural justice
It also provides draft formats for appeals and guidance on assembling documentary evidence.
A broader constitutional concern
While the booklet is framed as a practical guide, it advances a larger argument—that the current SIR risks altering the nature of electoral inclusion in India.
By requiring existing voters to repeatedly establish their eligibility, it raises questions about:
- The presumption of citizenship attached to electoral rolls
- The balance between administrative verification and democratic access
- The potential for exclusion through procedural complexity
A tool for navigation—and documentation
Ultimately, “Inside the Special Intensive Revision (SIR)” positions itself as both:
- A manual for survival within the system, and
- A record of how that system is functioning in practice
It reflects a moment where an electoral exercise is not only being implemented, but also contested, documented, and navigated simultaneously.
The complete booklet may be read here:
The press release may be read here:
The presentation may be accessed here:
Related:
VFD’s rebuttal of the Fadnavis’ Claims on Electoral Manipulation Allegations
Vote for Democracy (VFD) releases report on the conduct of General Election 2024
The Bihar Verdict 2025: How an election was engineered before votes were cast
The Stolen Franchise: Why the Election Commission cannot escape accountability
Major Irregularities in 2024 Maharashtra Vidhan Sabha Polls; Vote for Democracy