Former Union Minister RK Singh Questions SIR Process, Cites Voter Deletions And Form 6

Former Union minister Raj Kumar Singh has accused Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar of violating electoral law in the conduct of the Election Commission’s Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls, alleging that the exercise could disenfranchise voters.

In an open letter addressed to “all countrymen”, Singh, a former Union power minister and retired IAS officer, questioned the legal basis and procedure of the SIR. “Do you want India to remain a democracy?” he asked, alleging that the Election Commission was “violating the law” and pursuing a mission “to disenfranchise people”.

Congress leader Pawan Khera on Tuesday described Singh’s letter as a “devastating indictment” of the poll panel. Khera said Singh’s administrative experience meant his concerns could not simply be dismissed as partisan rhetoric.

Legal Concerns

Singh’s legal objections centre on Sections 21 and 22 of the Representation of the People Act, 1950. He argued that Section 21 permits a special revision only in special circumstances, for reasons recorded in writing, and only in a constituency or part of one.

He questioned the decision to conduct the exercise across the country and also asked whether it had been approved by the full Election Commission or only by the CEC.

Singh further alleged that revised electoral rolls containing deletions were being used while appeals against those deletions remained pending. Referring to Section 22, he said names could be removed only by an Electoral Registration Officer after an inquiry and a reasonable opportunity of hearing.

He alleged that the SIR had instead shifted the burden of proving eligibility onto voters whose names were removed. Singh cited the Supreme Court’s 1995 judgment in Lal Babu Hussain and Others v. Electoral Registration Officer and Others, arguing that the burden should lie with the authority conducting the inquiry or the objector rather than the voter.

Singh also questioned an appendix added to Form 6 that seeks the serial number of a parent’s entry in the 2003 electoral roll. He argued that the requirement could create difficulties for young people seeking to register as voters.

Concerns Over Centralisation

The former minister also raised questions over the centralisation of electoral-roll management. He alleged that Electoral Registration Officers, District Election Officers and Chief Electoral Officers were not being given adequate access to voter data, despite their statutory responsibilities.

Singh also criticised the “logical discrepancy” criterion used during the revision, arguing that technical inconsistencies in age and family records could disproportionately affect poorer voters who lack formal documentation.

He claimed that around 13 crore names had been deleted through the SIR so far, and alleged that the exercise could have a significant impact on elections. These figures and allegations are contested political claims.

Khera said Singh’s letter raised eight concerns, including alleged violations of electoral procedure, centralisation of electoral powers, denial of natural justice, barriers for young voters and migrants, and questions over the Election Commission’s institutional independence.

The SIR has faced criticism from opposition parties, while the Election Commission has maintained that the exercise is intended to identify dead, duplicate and ineligible entries and improve the accuracy of electoral rolls. The controversy comes amid reported differences among Election Commissioners over aspects of the exercise.