सुप्रीम कोर्ट ने दिल्ली के वोटर लिस्ट रिव्यू में ‘लॉजिकल डिस्क्रिपेन्सी’ नोटिस को यांत्रिक बताया

Supreme Court Says ECI's 'Logical Discrepancy' Notices In Delhi SIR Appear to be 'Mechanical'

New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Tuesday, September 22, heard a petition related to the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of voter lists in Delhi. A bench of Chief Justice of India (CJI) Surya Kant, Justice Joymalya Bagchi and Justice V. Mohana observed during the hearing that the Election Commission of India (ECI) must clarify what a logical discrepancy is.

The bench asked the commission to examine whether "additional filters" were needed before issuing notices for logical discrepancies. The court observed that the ECI should issue guidance on the documents needed to address each kind of discrepancy for which it was issuing notices.

“Almost mechanically notices are being issued. In all probability, they are machine-generated notices. So please examine whether some additional filters are necessary before the notices,” said Justice Bagchi.

Senior Advocate D.S. Naidu, appearing for ECI, said grievances would be examined and maintained that every notice contained the reason for which it had been issued.

The petition, filed by transparency activists Anjali Bharadwaj and Amrita Johri, has sought a clear definition of ‘logical discrepancy’ in the context of the Delhi SIR. Their petition highlights voters' concerns over being sent incomplete notices. It said that many voters were not being told in these notices which discrepancy had affected their enrolment.

The petitioners, represented by Supreme Court advocate Prashant Bhushan and advocate Neha Rathi, have asked for the ECI to disclose the names of those it has issued notices to under the SIR exercise. They point out that this lack of transparency violates the procedure prescribed by the ECI in its own communication from May 14, 2026.

“What is happening in the Delhi SIR is glaring. They [ECI officials] are saying that they are issuing notices to 33 lakh people. There are daily wagers among these people. How many people can respond to these kinds of notices?” Bhushan said during the hearing.

The court also said during the hearing that voters must be allowed to submit documents over WhatsApp or email, and that ECI must not insist on their physical appearance.

The ECI argued in court that around 14,000 Booth Level Officers (BLOs) and 1,200 Electoral Registration Officers (EROs) are working on the Delhi SIR and that that the ECI was open to an extension if the process was not completed by the October 29 deadline, reports Live Law.

The SIR in Delhi has been controversial since it began on June 30, with nearly one-third of the capital’s voters, over 47 lakh people, deleted during the preparation of the draft voter list, which was published on August 31. Notices are being sent to 33 lakh people in addition to the [roughly 11 lakh] names removed from the draft list prior to the SIR.

The bench asked on Tuesday how many BLOs had been deployed to deal with the large number of notices. "You sent about 30 lakh notices. How many BLOs are deployed?" Justice Bagchi asked.

Naidu said around 14,000 BLOs and 1,200 Electoral Registration Officers (EROs) had been deployed. He added that October 29 was the deadline and that the ECI was open to an extension if the process was not complete, said reports.

CJI Kant, referring to samples of notices shown to the court by ECI, observed that reasons were mentioned in them. He said BLOs should assist voters and that, in cases involving the old 2002 electoral roll, identification of the relevant name could be sufficient.

Bhushan, however, asked those who had submitted an enumeration form and produced proof of age and residence should be made to furnish more documents.

The CJI observed, as per Live Law, that the Delhi situation could be unique. "In Delhi, problem would be unique. Vast population would be of original Delhiites. But a person like my brother, my sister... we are coming here... we are migrant workers here. I will have to tell I was in Chandigarh, now I am in Delhi. It will ensure there is no double vote," he said.

It was also argued in court on Tuesday that certain factors regarded by the ECI as logical discrepancies had no connection with the right or ability to vote – these include the criterion for age gap with parents.

The ECI has asked booth level officers or BLOs to flag voters whose parents may appear on the record as fewer than 15 years older than them. Another requirement is that grandparents must not be less than 40 years older than a voter. Even those with five or more siblings or where the age gap between siblings is less than nine months are being flagged and issued notices.

"Subjecting electors, including senior citizens, the poor and marginalised, to mandatory scrutiny, notice proceedings and potential deletion merely because of an algorithmic anomaly regarding their age gap relative to a parent or grandparent or their siblings is inherently illogical and arbitrary," said the petitioners.

They said it was turning the SIR process into an unreasonable and arbitrary burden on eligible voters.

During the hearing, it was highlighted that the notices issued to many voters gave no guidance on how to remedy any discrepancy. They only direct the elector to appear with the documents prescribed by ECI (12 indicative documents) to retain their name in the final electoral roll.

"This is inherently illogical," the petitioners contended. "If a person has received a notice regarding age difference with parent being less than 15 years or age difference with sibling being less than nine months, how will the voter producing their own passport or matriculation certificate address the notified discrepancy?"

Naidu said during the hearing that the 12 documents were not exhaustive. “Whatever convincing source they have, that can be placed before the authority. It is not exhaustive,” he said.

Asking voters to fill Form 6 when they were not new voters but had actully shifted (and so had to fill Form 8) was also brought up, with the aim to highlight voters being excluded arbitrarily evcen though they had been "mapped" to previous elections, and then being asked to give false disclosure.

The bench issued notice and asked the ECI to indicate the immediate steps taken so far. The matter has been listed after two weeks.

For our full coverage on the SIR and the issues it has brought to citizens, click here.

This article went live on September twenty-second, two thousand twenty six, at fifty-three minutes past nine at night.The Wire is now on WhatsApp. Follow our channel for sharp analysis and opinions on the latest developments.

Powered by Nyaya 247 News