New Delhi, October 26, 2026 (Yes Punjab News)
The Supreme Court on Monday issued notices to the Election Commission of India (ECI), the Centre, the Chief Electoral Officer and the Maharashtra government on a petition challenging the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls in Maharashtra over alleged large-scale voter deletions. However, it declined to grant immediate relief on extending the deadline for filing claims and objections or halting publication of the final electoral roll.
A Bench comprising Chief Justice of India Surya Kant and Justices Joymalya Bagchi and V. Mohana scheduled the next hearing for November 5.
The petition, filed by Arun Anandagiri, challenges the deletion of names from the draft electoral rolls and the procedure prescribed for voters seeking restoration of their names.
Appearing for the petitioner, senior advocate Arvind P. Datar submitted that nearly 33 per cent of Maharashtra’s approximately nine crore voters—around three crore people—had been removed following the publication of the draft rolls.
He said 1.22 crore voters had been deleted on the ground of “logical discrepancy”. Datar argued that people whose names had been removed were being asked to submit Form 6, which is intended for fresh voter registration, despite having voted in previous elections.
He contended that requiring existing voters to submit the form could expose them to allegations of making false declarations, as applicants must state that they have not previously been registered as voters.
Referring to a recent Delhi High Court order, Datar argued that an assurance against prosecution did not address the underlying procedural issue. He urged the Supreme Court to direct the ECI to introduce a separate form for voters whose names had been deleted during the revision exercise.
“Nobody will be prosecuted,” the Bench headed by CJI Surya Kant assured the petitioner’s counsel.
Datar also sought an extension of the deadline for filing claims and objections, which expired on Monday, and requested that the ECI be restrained from finalising the electoral rolls until the matter was adjudicated.
He argued that Maharashtra did not face an immediate election that required the electoral roll to be finalised on the existing schedule.
However, the Bench was reluctant to pass an interim order without first hearing the poll body. It noted that the Supreme Court had extended deadlines for SIR exercises in other states and indicated that appropriate directions could be considered after examining the circumstances of the Maharashtra case.
Under the revised schedule, the draft electoral roll for Maharashtra was published on August 31, while the deadline for filing claims and objections was extended until October 26. The disposal of claims and objections is scheduled to continue until November 10, with the final electoral roll slated for publication on November 16.
The Supreme Court had earlier upheld the ECI’s authority to conduct the SIR exercise, holding that the revision fell within the poll body’s constitutional and statutory powers and was intended to safeguard the integrity of electoral rolls and ensure free and fair elections.
In its May 27 judgment, the apex court held that the exercise was authorised under Article 324 of the Constitution, read with Section 21(3) of the Representation of the People Act, 1950. It also ruled that the revision process included procedural safeguards against arbitrary exclusion.
The court further clarified that the ECI could examine citizenship-related questions for electoral purposes, while emphasising that such scrutiny would not constitute a final determination of an individual’s citizenship.
FOLLOW NOW
