Addressing allegations raised by opposition parties regarding the removal of over 13 crore voters during the Special Intensive Revision (SIR), the Election Commission of India has issued a comprehensive clarification detailing the procedural framework. The poll authority clarified that the nationwide verification identified entries that were absent, permanently shifted, deceased, or registered in duplicate records across locations. Consequently, these names were categorized under the administrative ASDD (Absent, Shifted, Dead, Duplicate) list.
Review Spanned 95.40 Crore Electors Across Three Phases
According to figures released by the Election Commission, the SIR exercise examined records of 95.40 crore registered voters across three structured phases. Of this vast total, 13.39 crore electors were classified under specific operational categories. The commission stressed that an inclusion in the ASDD registry does not signify the permanent revocation of a citizen's constitutional right to vote, emphasizing that the exercise is designed to clean the electoral roll and maintain accurate registries.
Ground Verification by 10 Lakh BLOs and 22 Lakh BLAs
The ground-level implementation of the intensive revision across states involved a large-scale administrative deployment. Over 10 lakh Booth Level Officers (BLOs) conducted field checks to compile the booth-level ASDD lists. To ensure absolute transparency and afford political stakeholders an opportunity to inspect every entry, booth-wise ASDD registers were formally distributed to more than 22 lakh Booth Level Agents (BLAs) appointed by political parties for verification.
Breakdown of Categorized Electors
Data provided by the commission shows that the single largest share among the 13.39 crore categorized electors consisted of citizens who had permanently relocated from their listed addresses. Permanently transferred individuals accounted for 6.30 crore entries. Furthermore, voters classified as absent or untraceable totaled 3.01 crore. Other segments inside the classified group comprised deceased individuals and duplicate entries documented across multiple polling stations.
Month-Long Window for Claims and Objections
The Election Commission highlighted that following the publication of the draft electoral rolls, a window of approximately one month was provided for citizens to file claims and objections. If an eligible voter had been erroneously left out, the framework permitted immediate inclusion through the submission of Form 6. The commission's SIR guidelines explicitly incorporate this mechanism to reintegrate any genuine voter who remained unlisted.
Formal Objection Process and Appellate Remedies
The poll authority also noted that mechanisms exist to file formal objections if an ineligible individual's name inadvertently remains on the voter register. Moreover, any citizen whose name does not appear on the final publication retains the statutory right to appeal before the District Election Officer (DM) or the Chief Electoral Officer (CEO). The commission maintained that the dual objective of the exercise is the strict retention of every eligible voter alongside the removal of all ineligible entries.
Voter Enrollment Remains a Continuous Exercise
Responding to political controversy surrounding the revisions, the commission reiterated that voter registration is an ongoing, continuous administrative process rather than an isolated event. Eligible citizens whose names were omitted or marked under ASDD categories can submit Form 6 at any point to restore their voter status. The commission underscored that legitimate electors retain unhindered avenues to update their details and secure their democratic franchise.
