The Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls commenced across Karnataka on June 30, bringing over 5.54 crore existing registered electors under a month-long house-to-house verification exercise. The revision is part of the Election Commission of India’s nationwide programme covering 16 States and three Union Territories, with October 1, 2026, fixed as the qualifying date.
The SIR exercise in Karnataka has begun amid intense political debate. The Congress-led State government has repeatedly said that it is not opposed to updating electoral rolls but has questioned the manner in which the present framework is being implemented. The concerns stem from issues of transparency, safeguards against wrongful deletions, the use of software in identifying discrepancies and the burden placed on voters.
On the first day of the exercise, Karnataka Chief Electoral Officer V. Anbu Kumar attempted to address several of these concerns by clarifying that Booth Level Officers (BLOs) would not demand any documentary proof during the house-to-house enumeration. At the same time, the State Cabinet and senior ministers continued to seek greater clarity from the Election Commission before the process moves further.
No documents during house-to-house survey, says CEO
Ahead of the commencement of the exercise, Chief Electoral Officer (CEO), V. Anbu Kumar clarified that electors would not be required to produce any documents during the month-long door-to-door enumeration. According to the CEO, BLOs have been instructed only to distribute and collect Enumeration Forms. Documentary verification, he said, is not part of the initial house visit, as Times of India reported
The forms are available in Kannada, though electors may fill them either in Kannada or in English. The Election Commission has also enabled online submission through the Voters’ Service Portal and the ECINET mobile application.
View this post on Instagram
The enumeration exercise will continue from June 30 to July 29.
After the completion of the exercise, the draft electoral rolls will be published on August 5. Claims and objections may be filed until September 4, these will be decided by October 3, and the final electoral rolls are scheduled to be published on October 7.
More than 5 cores electors exist in Karnataka
The Election Commission has stated that all 5, 54, 32,314 electors presently enrolled in Karnataka will be covered during the exercise. Around 59,050 Booth Level Officers, supported by supervisors and election officials across districts, have been deployed. BLOs have been instructed to visit every household and, wherever necessary, make up to three visits to ensure that eligible voters are not left out. While the clarification that no documents would be collected during house-to-house visits has addressed one immediate concern, the Election Commission has also imposed a pre-condition that could amount to ensuring exclusions.
The CEO stated that only those electors who submit the filled Enumeration Form within the prescribed period will find their names in the draft electoral rolls. This effectively makes the submission of the form central to the continuation of an elector’s name in the draft roll, even though documentary proof is not being sought during the initial visit. Eligible citizens who have recently turned eighteen or otherwise qualify for enrolment will have to submit Form 6 for inclusion in the electoral rolls, as reported
Logical discrepancies remain one of the biggest concerns
Perhaps the most closely watched aspect of the Karnataka exercise is the identification of so-called “logical discrepancies.” This vague and untested category had amounted to 27 lakh exclusions in West Bengal! The CEO has listed six categories of such ‘logical discrepancies’ that have presently been identified, although the final number will become clear only after the publication of the draft electoral rolls on August 5. Explaining some of these categories, he said notices may be issued where “the age difference between father and child is less than 15 years,” where “the age difference between grandfather and grandson is more than 40 years,” or where there are inconsistencies relating to gender and family relationships.
According to the CEO, Assistant Electoral Registration Officers would issue notices asking electors to submit supporting documents wherever such discrepancies are detected.
However, while examples have been provided, the Election Commission has not yet publicly released the complete methodology, software logic or technical standards through which such discrepancies are identified. It is precisely this lack of transparency that has become the central point of disagreement between the Karnataka government and the Election Commission.
State Cabinet says it supports revision, not arbitrary deletions
A day before the exercise began, the Karnataka Cabinet discussed the SIR process and formally recorded its concerns. The Cabinet maintained that updating electoral rolls is necessary, but insisted that the process must remain transparent, legally sound and free from arbitrary action.
In a detailed statement shared on social media, Home Karnataka Minister Priyank Kharge said that:
“The Karnataka Cabinet supports transparent, evidence-based revision of electoral rolls, but has raised serious concerns about opacity, arbitrariness and possible disenfranchisement in the current SIR framework.”
He further wrote that. “the Cabinet has made it clear, Karnataka supports revision of electoral rolls, not subversion of electoral rolls. The ECI is yet to respond.”
The statement reflects the State government’s position that electoral roll revision itself is not under challenge. Instead, the concerns relate to the manner in which the current framework is proposed to operate. Through the Cabinet’s resolution, Priyank Kharge outlined an extensive set of demands before the SIR process progresses further in Karnataka.
The Karnataka Cabinet supports transparent, evidence-based revision of electoral rolls, but has raised serious concerns about opacity, arbitrariness and possible disenfranchisement in the current SIR framework.
The Cabinet resolved that before SIR is implemented in Karnataka,…
— Priyank Kharge / ಪ್ರಿಯಾಂಕ್ ಖರ್ಗೆ (@PriyankKharge) June 30, 2026
The Cabinet has asked the Election Commission to undertake a full independent review of the entire SIR process, including its legal basis, deletion criteria, supervisory mechanism, software systems and safeguards.
It has also sought an extension of the timeline for submission of Enumeration Forms from one month to at least three months, arguing that the present schedule places undue pressure on Booth Level Officers, election officials and ordinary citizens.
Another major demand relates to transparency. The Cabinet has sought publication of a comprehensive manual explaining every category of “logical discrepancy”, the software or algorithm used to detect such discrepancies, the standard operating procedures, the officials responsible for decision-making and the documents that may be required from electors.
The State government has further demanded that no elector should receive a notice unless a prior physical field verification has been conducted by the Booth Level Officer. It has argued that minor spelling mistakes, clerical errors or transliteration differences should never become grounds for objection.
The Cabinet has also insisted that no voter should be deleted without prior notice, an opportunity to be heard before an impartial authority and a reasoned speaking order.
It has sought clarification on the complete list of admissible documents, reconsideration of the exclusion of Aadhaar and Voter ID wherever applicable, recognition of Karnataka’s Kutumba ID in appropriate cases and assurance that the burden of proving eligibility is not unfairly shifted onto ordinary citizens.
The State government has additionally sought simultaneous processing of valid Form 6 applications and Form 7 objections, safeguards against bulk objections leading to mass deletions, publication of machine-readable daily data relating to notices, additions and deletions, public disclosure and independent testing of all software used in the process, clearer definition of the role of Special Roll Observers and Micro-Observers, and enhanced safeguards for vulnerable groups including women, migrant workers, slum residents, nomadic and de-notified tribes, widows, persons with disabilities, orphans and transgender persons.
While the SIR exercise in Karnataka has commenced, the Election Commission has, so far, not publicly responded to these demands.
CM promises permanent residence certificate for voters
Chief Minister D.K. Shivakumar has also intervened on the issue by assuring citizens that the State government would facilitate the issuance of Permanent Residence Certificates for those who require them during the SIR process. The assurance came after concerns were raised about documentation and the practical difficulties faced by many electors in obtaining supporting records, as reported
The Chief Minister has also maintained that the State government will examine legal options depending on the Election Commission’s response to the concerns raised by the Cabinet.
The larger issue is about safeguards, not merely enumeration
Although the Election Commission has repeatedly stated that the objective of the SIR is to ensure an accurate electoral roll, the political debate in Karnataka has increasingly shifted towards procedural safeguards.
Questions are being raised about how discrepancies are identified, who supervises the process, how notices are generated and what legal protections exist before an elector’s name can ultimately be deleted. The clarification that no documents are required during house-to-house visits addresses only one stage of the process. Concerns continue over what happens after the draft electoral roll is published, particularly in cases where notices may be issued on the basis of “logical discrepancies.”
The absence of publicly available technical documentation explaining these discrepancy categories has further contributed to demands for greater transparency.
Fear of wrongful deletion continues to shape public discourse
Among several sections of voters, the discussion around SIR is being shaped not only by the current guidelines but also by concerns arising from earlier electoral roll revision exercises in different parts of the country where allegations of wrongful deletions had led to on ground fear among the marginalised electors.
Political parties and civil society groups have repeatedly argued that even a small number of erroneous deletions can significantly affect citizens because the right to vote depends entirely upon inclusion in the electoral roll.
For many electors, especially elderly persons, migrant workers, tenants, persons living in informal settlements and economically weaker sections, concerns remain about whether procedural requirements can be completed within the prescribed timeline and whether genuine mistakes in records may eventually result in exclusion.
It is against this backdrop that Karnataka’s month-long SIR exercise has begun. While the Election Commission has emphasised participation and administrative preparedness, the State government continues to press for greater transparency, procedural safeguards and stronger protection against wrongful disenfranchisement. The coming weeks—leading up to the publication of the draft electoral rolls on August 5—are likely to determine whether these concerns are addressed through administrative clarification or result in the wrongful disenfranchisement of existing electors.
Related:
Judgement delivered, paradox prevails: every voter a citizen, but what is the fate of 51.8 million excluded?
SC greenlights SIR, upholds ECI’s power to revise electoral rolls
The Bihar Verdict 2025: How an election was engineered before votes were cast