MPHC petition challenges legality of voter revision amid SIR:Petitioner alleges statutory inconsistencies and zero-address entries; court directs authorities to file responses

The Indore Bench of the Madhya Pradesh High Court has sought responses from the State Election Commission, the Urban Administration Department, the Indore Collector and registration officers of all city assembly constituencies on a petition challenging the ongoing voter list revision process. The division bench has fixed November 26 as the next date of hearing. Petition challenges voter list revision during SIR exercise The petition, filed by former corporator Dileep Kaushal through advocates Vibhor Khandelwal and Jayesh Gurnani, questions the validity of the voter list revision programme issued by the State Election Commission earlier this year. The exercise is underway in all urban bodies and 417 panchayats across Madhya Pradesh. The petitioner argues that the revision overlaps with the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) being carried out by the Election Commission of India, creating confusion and inconsistencies, particularly as the opposition continues to allege large-scale voter manipulation. Allegations of faulty rules and lack of transparency The petition claims several provisions under the Madhya Pradesh Electoral Rules, 1994 are ‘faulty’ and inconsistent with the Representation of the People Act, 1950. It alleges that applications submitted for addition and deletion of names was not published, preventing citizens from filing objections. Further, the petitioner highlights multiple irregularities, including thousands of voters being listed under house number ‘0’, failure to follow ECI norms for forming polling stations and the appointment of ineligible personnel as BLOs. Claims of large-scale discrepancies in Indore voter list Kaushal informed the court that he has been working on voter list-related issues since 2020 and found numerous discrepancies during the latest revision. He pointed out that nearly 475 polling stations in Indore have fewer than 500 registered voters, while one polling station in Assembly 5 has only 40 voters. He argued that such anomalies, along with uncorrected objections regarding house numbers and polling station norms, indicate serious procedural lapses and strengthen accusations of voter manipulation. Court seeks response by November 26 Advocates Khandelwal and Gurnani told the court that contradictions between state rules and central law, combined with administrative errors, are infringing upon citizens’ constitutional rights. They said the petition was filed only after authorities failed to take corrective measures. Taking note of the concerns, the division bench of Justice Vijay Kumar Shukla and Justice Bindu Kumar Dwivedi directed all respondents to submit replies before the next hearing on November 26, 2025.