New Delhi: Leader of the opposition in the Lok Sabha Rahul Gandhi allegation that voters from Congress strongholds were deleted from electoral rolls in Karnataka during the 2023 Assembly election,has once again drawn attention to the little-understood process of how voter names can be deleted from the rolls in India. Can it really be done in a matter of seconds or minutes? Here is what it entails
Legal basis and the role of election officers
The framework for voter deletion is established under the Representation of the People Act, 1950, and the Registration of Electors Rules, 1960. Every constituency has an Electoral Registration Officer (ERO), who maintains and revises the electoral roll. The ERO is supported by Booth Level Officers (BLOs), who are responsible for field verification at the polling station level. Deletions from the roll can only be made on legally specified grounds, such as the death of a voter, migration out of the constituency, duplication (if the same person is registered in more than one place), or disqualification under the law, such as conviction for certain offences.
The procedure for initiating deletion begins with an application. The prescribed document for this is Form 7, titled “Application for objecting inclusion or seeking deletion of name in electoral roll.” It can be filed by the voter themselves, by a relative in cases of death, or by another voter of the constituency who has reason to believe that an entry is invalid. The form requires details of the voter whose name is sought to be removed, the reason for deletion, and the particulars of the person making the application. It includes a declaration that the information given is true, and making a false statement is a punishable offence. Form 7 may be filed offline with the ERO, through BLOs, or online through the National Voters’ Service Portal and state portals.
The Congress brought an Aland resident named Suryakant on stage and played a video of another, Godabai — two complainants who tried to delete the names of voters from the rolls. The Congress alleged that Suryakant filed 12 deletion forms in 14 minutes, and another resident, Nagraj, filed two applications in 36 seconds at 4:07 am — an unusual time to file complaints.
{{/usCountry}}The Congress brought an Aland resident named Suryakant on stage and played a video of another, Godabai — two complainants who tried to delete the names of voters from the rolls. The Congress alleged that Suryakant filed 12 deletion forms in 14 minutes, and another resident, Nagraj, filed two applications in 36 seconds at 4:07 am — an unusual time to file complaints.
{{/usCountry}}HT tested the process by submitting a Form 7 online and found that even with all details — EPIC number, constituency, address, and reason for deletion — ready, completing the application took around five minutes.
Notice, verification, and software safeguards
Once Form 7 is received, the ERO is required to scrutinise it. If it is found prima facie valid, a notice is issued to the voter concerned, informing them that an application has been made to delete their name. The law requires that no name be deleted without affording the person an opportunity of being heard. BLOs may conduct field verification, visiting the voter’s address to check whether they still reside there or to confirm reports of death. In cases of migration, documents or statements may be sought.
The Election Commission manages electoral roll data using software systems including ERONet and the Electoral Roll Management System (ERMS). These platforms allow applications such as Form 7 to be submitted and tracked online, record verification steps, and manage the publication of draft rolls. ERONet handles the online submission of applications, logging of user activity, and OTP-based verification, while ERMS is used to maintain the master electoral roll and process revisions in compliance with legal safeguards. Both systems are linked to state Chief Electoral Officer portals and allow EROs and BLOs to track deletion and addition requests. Importantly, these systems do not allow automatic deletion of names without notice, field verification, and a hearing.
Allegations of software-driven “bulk deletion” without human intervention, such as those raised by Gandhi, are not supported by publicly available documentation of these systems.
The ERO then holds a hearing, where both the applicant and the voter concerned may present their case. Only after this process does the officer pass a written order either accepting or rejecting the deletion request. Even during large-scale revision exercises, such as the annual roll update with January 1 as the qualifying date or the latest Special Intensive Revision (SIR) drive in Bihar, draft rolls are published publicly. Objections can be filed during this period, and all proposed deletions are subject to verification before the final roll is published.
Interestingly, in its last update on the SIR in Bihar, the EC on September 1 had said that it received 119 claims for exclusion from BLAs of political parties, as compared to 25 claims for inclusion. Additionally, it received 2,17,049 claims for exclusion directly from electors and 36,475 for inclusion.
The law also provides for remedies in cases of error. If a voter finds their name has been deleted wrongly, they may apply for inclusion afresh using Form 6, along with proof of residence and identity. Orders of the ERO can also be appealed to higher officials such as the district election officer or the chief electoral officer of the state. Courts have in the past directed the election commission to ensure that deletions are carried out with strict compliance with these safeguards.
Past controversies and present debate
Despite these legal protections, allegations of wrongful deletions have been a recurring feature in Indian elections. In Telangana in 2018, lakhs of names were found missing from the rolls, leading to political protests. In Delhi in 2019, opposition parties alleged that voters belonging to specific communities were disproportionately removed. The Election Commission defended itself in those cases, citing migration and duplication, but admitted that errors can occur during large-scale data verification.
High courts in different states have intervened to stress that disenfranchisement through arbitrary deletion cannot be permitted.
Rahul Gandhi on Thursday said that there were attempts to delete the names of 6,018 voters in the Aland constituency of Karnataka in December 2022 and add the names of 6,850 “fake voters” in Maharashtra’s Rajura constituency in 2024. Speaking at party headquarters Indira Bhawan in Delhi, Gandhi said the Karnataka Crime Investigation Department (CID) wrote 18 times to the Election Commission of India (ECI) seeking details such as OTP trails and destination ports involved in such deletions, adding that “EC has not given it because this will lead us to where the operations are being done.”
In its response, the ECI pointed out that it too filed a First Information Report (FIR) following the unsuccessful attempt, and that the seat was won by the Congress in the May 2023 Assembly election. The Congress’s B.R. Patil won the Aland seat by 10,348 votes, defeating the BJP’s Subhash Guttedar. It also pointed out that voter names can’t be struck off online.
“Allegations made by Rahul Gandhi are incorrect and baseless. No deletion of any vote can be done online by any member of the public, as misconceived by Gandhi. No deletion can take place without giving an opportunity of being heard to the affected person,” ECI said in a post on X.