The Bombay High Court on 30 September 2026 ruled that the draft electoral roll prepared under the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) cannot be used as a basis to delete names of existing electors. The judgment highlights the conflict between administrative software and statutory safeguards in India’s electoral system.
Key Developments
- The court dismissed the petition of Paresh Salgaonkar and his family, who were denied inclusion after their EPIC was marked as deleted in the draft roll.
- The judges questioned the ECI on its power to delete names without a hearing.
- The court observed that the ERONET software offered only a ‘reject’ option when no EPIC record existed, forcing applicants to use Form 6 instead of the appropriate Form 8.
- The bench stressed that once a Form 8 is received, the authority must “apply its mind” to verify the genuine shift of residence, rather than relying on automated rejections.
Important Facts
During the third phase of SIR, over 6 crore deletions were recorded in draft rolls nationwide, with Maharashtra alone seeing more than 2 crore proposed deletions. The judges noted that such mass deletions, if unchecked, could disenfranchise lakhs of citizens.
The petitioners were instructed by their BLO to submit Form 8 for a change of address after moving within the Santa Cruz Assembly constituency. Their request was rejected because the EPIC was absent from the draft roll.
Exam Relevance
This case underscores several core topics for the UPSC syllabus:
- Legal safeguards in electoral administration – the role of courts in upholding statutory rights.
- Functions and limitations of the ECI and its digital tools like ERONET.
- Procedural aspects of voter registration – understanding Form 6, Form 7, and Form 8 and their legal significance.
- Impact of large‑scale data‑driven exercises such as SIR on democratic participation.
Way Forward
The judgment calls for the ECI to revise its software so that genuine address changes can be processed without automatically deleting EPICs. It also urges a statutory clarification on the power to delete names without a hearing, ensuring compliance with the Representation of the People Act. For aspirants, tracking subsequent amendments to the electoral roll management system will be crucial for answering questions on electoral reforms and governance challenges.