A recent report by the SPECT Research Association has raised serious concerns over the impact of the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls in West Bengal, highlighting largescale voter deletions, widespread scrutiny, and allegations of disproportionate impact on marginalised communities.
The SIR exercise, conducted by the Election Commission of India (ECI) between November 2025 and February 2026, was aimed at updating voter lists by removing duplicate, shifted, or ineligible entries while including new voters. The process involved house-to-house verification, publication of draft rolls, and a claims and objections period before the final electoral roll was released on February 28, 2026.
However, findings from the report suggest that the revision led to the deletion of approximately 63.66 lakh voters, around 8.3% of the electorate, while nearly 60 lakh names remain under adjudication. In total, about 1.23 crore voters, nearly one in six, have either been removed or are awaiting verification, raising concerns about potential disenfranchisement.
The report identifies several key issues with the process, including largescale deletions, heavy documentation requirements, and technical flaws in verification systems. Critics argue that the use of centralised algorithms to flag “discrepancies” led to errors and mass identification of voters without adequate human oversight.
Particular concern has been expressed over the disproportionate impact on certain groups. Minority communities, especially Muslims in border districts such as Murshidabad and Malda, reportedly faced higher rates of scrutiny and verification notices. Similarly, Matua refugees, many of whom lack historical documentation, were identified as being at significant risk of losing voting rights.
Women were also notably affected, accounting for over 53% of deleted voters. Experts attribute this to structural issues such as lack of documentation in women’s names and changes in residence following marriage, which complicated verification.
Migrant workers emerged as another vulnerable group, with over 32 lakh voters marked as “shifted” or “untraceable,” often due to their absence during house-to-house verification drives. Urban districts like Kolkata recorded particularly high deletion rates, reflecting the challenges faced by mobile populations.
The report also points to regional disparities, with districts like North and South 24 Parganas, Murshidabad, and Malda witnessing the highest concentration of deletions and pending cases. In some minority-concentrated areas, a significant proportion of voters were placed under adjudication, intensifying fears of selective targeting.
While authorities maintain that the SIR process was uniformly applied and necessary for maintaining electoral integrity, Opposition parties and civil society groups have alleged political bias and lack of transparency. The scale and timing of the exercise, just ahead of key elections, have further fuelled the controversy.
The report concludes that, although intended as an administrative exercise, the SIR has exposed deep structural inequalities in access to documentation and administrative processes. It warns that the revision risks undermining the principle of universal adult suffrage by disproportionately affecting already vulnerable populations.