SIR-deleted voters may still cast votes:Old electoral rolls likely for mayor, councillor and sarpanch polls amid commission dispute

Despite having their names removed during the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls, voters in Madhya Pradesh may still be eligible to vote in next year’s Municipal Corporation and Panchayat elections. The development stems from an ongoing dispute between the Election Commission of India (ECI) and the State Election Commission (SEC) over sharing updated voter lists. The disagreement has raised the possibility that voters removed from one commission’s rolls could continue to remain registered in another commission’s list. Why has the dispute emerged? The controversy revolves around the sharing of revised electoral rolls prepared after the SIR exercise. The State Election Commission had requested the updated voter list from the ECI so that upcoming local body bypolls in 15 districts, along with next year’s urban and rural local body elections, could be conducted using the revised data. However, despite sending five separate letters and reminders, the SEC did not receive the updated list from the central poll body. Following this, the State Election Commission initiated the process of preparing a separate voter database at the district level. Over 34 lakh names removed after SIR The Election Commission of India released the final revised voter list on February 21, 2026. Based on the electoral roll status as of January 1, 2026, more than 34 lakh names were deleted after the claims and objections process was completed. Following the revision, the total number of voters in Madhya Pradesh stood at 5.39 lakh. Five letters sent, but no electoral roll shared As per rules, the central election body is expected to provide Assembly constituency-wise voter lists to the State Election Commission within 60 days. Between January 28 and April 22, the SEC reportedly sent five communications seeking the updated rolls. When no response came, the commission issued instructions on April 23 directing district officials to begin preparing independent voter lists for local elections. State officials confirm ECI decision Joint Chief Electoral Officer R.P. Singh Jadaun stated that the SEC had sought the voter list for electoral roll revision purposes. According to him, the ECI responded that it does not provide voter lists specifically for revision exercises. He clarified that the decision not to share the revised list was taken by the central election authority. Two major problems may arise The lack of coordination between the two election bodies could create significant practical issues. Traditionally, the State Election Commission prepares ward-wise voter rolls using Assembly electoral data. This time, however, the absence of synchronization may lead to two key situations: Experts call for integrated election system Retired election official R.R. Bansal said that traditionally, the State Election Commission updates its rolls using voter data received from the Election Commission of India. He suggested that concerns over discrepancies arising after the SIR process may have led to reluctance in sharing the revised lists. He also pointed out that voters can register different addresses for Assembly and local body elections. Former Chief Election Commissioner O.P. Rawat noted that the ECI updates electoral rolls four times a year, whereas State Election Commissions generally revise their lists only once annually. He said the differing revision cycles between the two systems often create inconsistencies and highlighted the need for a more integrated electoral management mechanism.