Supreme Court says Delhi SIR notices seem ‘machine-generated’ and mechanically issued

You don’t have any Active Subscription.

Account subscription benefits alongside Premium Stories, Editorials, Opinions and more. Unlock these with Subscription

Voters who received notices to prove eligibility in the ongoing special intensive revision (SIR) drive, with documents, at a hearing in Government Boys Senior Secondary School, Rajouri Garden Extension, in New Delhi on September 17, 2026. | Photo Credit: Shiv Kumar Pushpakar

The Supreme Court on Tuesday (September 22, 2026) said the Election Commission of India’s (ECI) notices during the special intensive revision (SIR) in Delhi to over 33 lakh voters due to ‘logical discrepancies’ or ‘no mapping’ with previous electoral records seems to be “machine-generated” without any application of mind.

“Some refinement is necessary. These look like mechanically issued notices. In all probability, they are machine-generated notices... Please examine if some additional filters are necessary,” Justice Joymalya Bagchi, part of a three-judge Bench with Chief Justice Surya Kant and Justice V. Mohana, addressed the Election Commission (EC) counsel, senior advocate Dama Seshadri Naidu.

Justice Bagchi further asked the ECI if the people to whom these notices were sent at least know what logical discrepancies they have to prove incorrect.

ALSO WATCH Delhi SIR: Rekha Gupta, Arvind Kejriwal among 33.1 lakh voters flagged for verification

Advocates Prashant Bhushan and Neha Rathi, activists Anjali Bhardwaj and Amrita Johri, referred to how 91% of the voters who appealed against the logical discrepancies the EC found against them have been re-included in the electoral roll.

“But the whole process of getting back into the electoral roll would take years. There are 33 lakh voters excluded in the draft roll out of total 97 lakh,” Mr. Bhushan submitted.

Chief Justice Kant said information could be sought from voters on WhatsApp or by email. The EC could evolve a mechanism by which information could be exchanged with voters online. This would relieve voters the drudgery of physically going for the verification process.

The court said the Delhi SIR may need better orientation. Some key political figures who were sent notices include External Affairs Minister S. Jaishankar, former Delhi Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal, current Chief Minister Rekha Gupta, former Deputy Prime Minister L.K. Advani, senior advocate Kapil Sibal, who was present in the court room, among others.

Mr. Naidu, on behalf of the ECI, said the deadline for notice disposal for the Delhi SIR was October 29. “But we are open to extension since it [Delhi] is not election-bound,” he submitted. Mr. Naidu assured that not a single voter would be deleted and reasons had indeed been assigned in the notices.

The petition flagged that apart from the more than 47 lakh people removed in the draft roll, the Election Commission was preparing notices to 33 lakh people on two grounds, logical discrepancies and mapping.

“Out of 97,53,577 electors who are listed on the draft Delhi SIR roll after the enumeration phase, 33,12,919 electors (33.96%) are being issued notices after being identified for either having no mapping (13,79,785) or for logical discrepancies (19,33,134). However, the respondents (Election Commission and the Chief Electoral Officer, Delhi) have failed to publish the list of electors to whom notices have been issued along with the specific basis thereof, contrary to the procedure,” the petition said.

It said the term ‘logical discrepancies’ was not defined by the ECI. There were neither parameters to determine the circumstances in which an elector would fall within that category nor any document or instruction regarding this aspect posted on the website.

With the notice phase for Delhi SIR concluding on October 29, the petition contended that issuance of vague notices would make lakhs of electors vulnerable to an arbitrary process of potential disenfranchisement.

The court issued notice to the ECI and sought a status report while listing the case for hearing after two weeks.

Comments have to be in English, and in full sentences. They cannot be abusive or personal. Please abide by our community guidelines for posting your comments.

We have migrated to a new commenting platform. If you are already a registered user of The Hindu and logged in, you may continue to engage with our articles. If you do not have an account please register and login to post comments. Users can access their older comments by logging into their accounts on Vuukle.