Large mismatch between 2003 and 2024 rolls leaves genuine voters fearing deletion.
BLOs lack clarity on how to handle voters missing from the 2003 list.
Twelve lakh deletions raise concerns about a disproportionate impact and the risk of a repeat of Bihar-like chaos.
When Saud Alam learned last week that neither his nor his family’s names appeared in the 2003 SIR (Special Intensive Revision) roll, anxiety gripped him.
The 35-year-old resident of Doranda, Ranchi, now fears that his and his family’s names may be deleted from the voter list. Explaining the source of his fear, he says, “Ever since the news came out that 12 lakh names may be removed during the SIR process, we’ve been scared that our family might also be among them. We voted in 2024; we’ve voted several times before that. Our names are on the 2024 list, yet the Booth Level Officer (BLO) is suddenly asking us to locate them in the 2003 roll. I checked the entire list, but we're nowhere to be found. The BLO insists we ‘must’ find our names. How am I supposed to find something that simply doesn’t exist?”
Saud claims his family is a “Khatiyani” family in Jharkhand for four generations. Yet he, his father Mohammad Shameem (65), mother Shahnaz Begum (55), uncle Mohammad Nesar (62), and 22 other relatives do not appear in the 2003 electoral roll.
His immediate concern, however, is his brother-in-law in Bengal, who calls him every day asking for a copy of the 2003 SIR roll that includes the names, serial numbers, and booth numbers of Saud’s parents—documents needed to add his wife’s (Saud’s sister’s) name to the Bengal voter list.
Saud says multiple households in Doranda face the same problem. He and others plan to approach the Jharkhand Election Commission.
The concern deepened after the December 3 news report quoting the Election Commission, stating that the 2024 voter list was being matched with the 2003 list for ancestral mapping. During this process, 12 lakh names were identified as dead, shifted, absent, or duplicate entries and would be deleted.
The Jharkhand State Election Commission says that voters listed in the 2024 electoral roll are being matched with the 2003 roll to carry out parental mapping. During this exercise, out of the state’s 2.65 crore voters, around 12 lakh names were found to belong to individuals who are dead, absent, have shifted, or whose names are listed in more than one location. Therefore, only these names will be removed from the rolls.
This raises a critical question: Are people whose names appear on the 2024 roll but not on the 2003 roll also at risk of deletion?
BLOs Are in the Dark
Mohammad Javed, 43, also from Ranchi, says his entire family is missing from the 2003 roll. Yet he insists he isn’t worried, “When the SIR begins, the BLO will tell us what to do. I don’t know why our names aren’t in the list, and the BLO didn’t explain anything.”
Javed’s parents, Ayyub Ansari (65) and Zubaida Khatoon (58), also do not appear in the 2003 roll. But instead of investigating, Javed is simply waiting for the SIR to begin.
Most voters say BLOs have only informed them that SIR has not officially started, and have not explained the process for those missing in the 2003 list. Media reports also state that SIR has not yet begun in Jharkhand.
A BLO, admitting on condition of maintaining his anonymity, “We have not been told how to handle cases where names are absent in 2003 or present only in 2024. Some people have names in 2024 but not in 2003; others appear in 2003 but not in 2024. Even three people in my own house don’t have their names in the 2003 roll — including my sister, who is a BLO herself.”
Is Ancestral Mapping a Part of SIR? The CEO Clarifies
Outlook spoke to Jharkhand Chief Electoral Officer Ravi Kumar, who clarified that ancestral mapping is indeed part of the SIR process, and there should be “no confusion.”
He explained that SIR has three phases: One: Pre-Revision Activities (currently ongoing in Jharkhand). Two: Enumeration Phase — BLOs collect data through household visits. Three: Claims and Objections Phase — already completed in Bihar.
On mapping, he said, “If your mapping is successful, it means your name existed in the 2003 roll, equivalent to self-verification. Children’s names get mapped through their parents.”
But what about those who are voters in 2024 but did not appear in 2003?
Ravi Kumar says, “Such voters will be asked to submit one of the 12 specified documents during the Claims and Objections phase. The ERO will hear the case and decide accordingly.”
He assures that no Indian citizen aged 18 or above will be deprived of their voting rights.
What Exactly Does an ERO Do? An Electoral Registration Officer (ERO) is responsible for preparing, updating, and revising the electoral roll of a given assembly constituency.
The Controversy Around 12 Documents
These same 12 documents triggered major protests during Bihar’s SIR exercise. BLOs had argued that only a few of them were common documents; essential IDs such as ration cards were not included.
The Election Commission’s list includes: Pre-1987 government-issued IDs, Birth certificate, passport, educational certificate, Caste certificate (SC/ST/OBC), Domicile certificate, Forest rights certificate, Land/house records, Family register, and NRC documents (not applicable in Bihar).
Lessons from Bihar: Confusion, Pressure, and Name Deletions
In Bihar. Initially, at least one document from the list was mandatory.
Common IDs like Aadhaar and ration cards were excluded.
After public outrage, BLOs began accepting forms even without documents.
Many BLOs, under immense pressure, filled forms without visiting households
Several names were deleted without verification.
BLOs admitted they were under orders to meet high quotas quickly.
A similar situation is reported in Jharkhand. A BLO from Sahibganj says, “Many names in the 2003 list are wrong or missing. Seniors tell us to just leave such cases — meaning, do not map these voters.”
Political Undercurrents: The Bangladesh Infiltration Narrative
The BJP has repeatedly raised concerns about alleged Bangladeshi infiltration in Santhal Pargana, especially in Sahibganj and Pakur — often in the context of voter lists. Sahibganj borders West Bengal, making anxieties over mapping especially sharp.
Local Panchayat head Ishtiyaq describes how voters are being categorised:
“A Category: Names match 2003
C & D Categories: Young voters (18–35) missing from the 2003 roll, but whose parents appear there
B Category: People above 40, who should appear in 2003 but don’t — the most problematic group.”
He adds that many landless people lack the documents demanded by the Commission.
CPI(ML) general secretary Dipankar Bhattacharya, who had strongly opposed Bihar’s SIR, says, “Despite the Supreme Court debates around Bihar’s SIR, states are blindly repeating Bihar’s flawed model. BLOs are breaking down, some even dying by suicide. The process seems designed to remove specific blocks of voters.”
The SIR-mapping exercise in Jharkhand has triggered confusion, fear, and administrative chaos—mirroring Bihar’s experience—because thousands of legitimate voters cannot locate their 2003 records, and even BLOs lack clarity on what happens next.
