The purpose of providing continuous information regarding SIR is to make the general public aware of the nature of this process and its requirements, so that citizens of areas, especially Telangana, where this process has not yet been implemented, can prepare mentally and documentarily in advance. Recent notices issued by the Election Commission to Mohammad Sami, a prominent Indian batsman, and Amartya Sen, a Nobel laureate economist, indicate how important it is for every citizen to be informed, aware, and cautious throughout this process.
The foundation of a democratic system is based on the principle that the right to vote is only available to eligible citizens and that the electoral process is transparent, fair, and trustworthy. Keeping this principle in mind, during the hearings in the Supreme Court regarding SIR, the Election Commission stated with certainty that the inclusion of foreigners in the voter list is not in accordance with constitutional requirements, and for this purpose, a special comprehensive review of the electoral rolls was initiated. This position appears to be in line with Article 324 of the Constitution of India, which empowers the Election Commission to prepare, review, and supervise electoral rolls. However, along with these powers comes the responsibility to maintain public confidence in the electoral process and to ensure that the right to vote of any eligible citizen is not unintentionally affected. This balance in electoral reforms is fundamental to the stability of the democratic system. According to the initial results of the special comprehensive review, significant changes have been observed in the voter lists in the states and centrally administered areas where this process has been implemented. According to available data, approximately 13% of voters' names have been removed from the lists. This change indicates a significant difference in the structure of the electoral rolls, the effects of which need to be assessed.
In this regard, Uttar Pradesh stands out as the most prominent example. According to the recently released draft voter list, the number of voters in the state has decreased by approximately 18.70%. Prior to the review, the number of voters was approximately 15.44 crore, which has now decreased to approximately 12.55 crore. Thus, nearly 2.89 crore names were not included in the lists. Similar changes have been observed in other states, reflecting the widespread impact of this process. The number of names deleted in Uttar Pradesh is by far the highest in any state or centrally administered area where the SIR process has been completed. Only Andaman and Nicobar Islands, a centrally administered area, recorded a higher percentage of exclusions than Uttar Pradesh.
According to the Election Commission, the names removed mostly belonged to individuals who had passed away, permanently moved to another location, or whose names fell under the category of duplicate entries. Such scrutiny is considered necessary for the accuracy of electoral rolls, but it is also important that this process is conducted in a manner that maintains the inclusion of eligible citizens.
15.44 crore: Voters before the review
2.89 crore: Removed during SIR
46.23 lakh: Deceased voters
2.17 crore: Voters permanently migrated or absent at the time of verification
25.47 lakh: Voters with duplicate registrations
12.55 crore: Final voter count (until January 6, 2026)
According to the Chief Electoral Officer of Uttar Pradesh, out of the 15.44 crore voters included in the previous list, 12.55 crore, or 81.3%, have been retained in the draft list. The remaining 18.7%, or approximately 2.89 crore voters, could not be included in the draft list for various reasons, including death, permanent migration, or registration in more than one place.
Reasons for name removal:
46.23 lakh voters (2.99%) had passed away
2.17 crore voters (14.06%) had permanently migrated or were not available during the verification process
25.47 lakh voters (1.65%) were found to be registered in more than one location
There is general agreement on the basic concept of special comprehensive review, but different opinions have emerged on the method of its practical implementation. According to observers, at this stage, the voter had to take relatively more personal responsibility for verifying their details. In the current process, the voter was instructed to fill out the form themselves, provide documents, and complete the process within the stipulated time. In past reviews, the election staff used to go door-to-door based on the initial lists to carry out the verification and correction process, which reduced the administrative pressure on the citizens. In the current procedure, this process proved to be relatively more laborious for some voters, especially for those who were not fully familiar with the procedure or could not complete the process within the stipulated time. In the initial stage, there was also some ambiguity regarding identity documents, which caused additional difficulties for some sections. These issues were facilitated in later stages, but by then changes had been made to the lists.
The effects of the special comprehensive review have emerged in different ways socially and geographically. In areas where the rate of internal or external migration is high, the proportion of changes in the voter lists has also been relatively high. Individuals who are temporarily residing in other cities for employment or other reasons have been excluded from the lists in some cases due to their inability to prove their presence. The data also shows that women voters faced additional difficulties due to differences or changes in documentary details, which affected their representation in the lists.
Analysis of districts and assembly constituencies: District-wise analysis in Uttar Pradesh shows that the decrease in voter lists has been relatively higher in urban and semi-urban districts. Lucknow tops the list of districts with the highest voter exclusion, i.e., the highest decrease in voter lists has been recorded in Lucknow, the state capital. According to the draft list:
Voter exclusion rate: 30.05%
Voter count before review: 39.94 lakh
Voter count after review: 27.94 lakh
Thus, approximately 12 lakh voters' names have been removed from the lists, which is the highest numerical and proportional decrease in the state. The number of voters in the state capital decreased by more than 30%.
Among other prominent districts, Ghaziabad ranked second, with a 28.83% decrease in voter lists. The voter count decreased from 28 lakh to 20 lakh. Balrampur ranked third, with a 25.98% decrease and the names of more than 4 lakh voters removed. These districts are considered significant in terms of urban sprawl, industrial activity, and population migration, which helps in understanding the trend of changes in voter lists. In some industrial and urban districts, this decrease ranged between 25 and 29 percent. These are the areas where a large number of migrant populations reside. Factors such as absenteeism and migration during the special review have affected the structure of the lists more in these districts.
Change in voter count in Muslim-majority districts: According to the draft electoral rolls, the rate of decrease in voter lists in some districts of Uttar Pradesh where the proportion of the Muslim population is between approximately 40 and 50 percent has been recorded between 15 and 19 percent. These districts include Moradabad, Saharanpur, Muzaffarnagar, Rampur, and Sambhal in particular. These districts are not only important in terms of population but also have a significant position from an electoral point of view. Overall, these districts consist of 28 assembly constituencies, due to which changes in voter lists here can affect the state electoral map.
Muraadabad: In the Muraadabad district, where 6 assembly constituencies are located, 3,87,628 names were removed from the voter list, representing a 15.6% decrease in the total voter count.
Saharanpur: Saharanpur, which includes 7 assembly constituencies, was the district with the highest decrease in numerical terms. Here, 4,32,539 voters' names were deleted, which is equal to a 16.37% decrease.
Muzaffarnagar: In Muzaffarnagar, where there are 6 assembly constituencies, 3,44,222 voters' names were removed from the list, resulting in a 16.29% decrease in the voter count.
Rampur: In the Rampur district, under which 5 assembly constituencies fall, 21,572 names were deleted from the voter list. This decrease is equivalent to 18.29%.
Sambhal: In the Sambhal district, where there are 4 assembly constituencies, a decrease of 3,18,615 in the number of voters was recorded, which amounts to 18.29%.
Trends and potential factors: In Uttar Pradesh, assembly constituencies are sensitive units in terms of voter count. When there is a significant decrease in voter lists in an urban or semi-urban area, its effects can be seen on constituency representation, urban vote ratio, and election results. In this context, the final form of voter lists in the upcoming elections becomes particularly important. An overall review of the data shows that there are some common factors in the districts where the rate of decrease in voter lists has been high, including a higher proportion of urban and semi-urban population, a high rate of internal and external migration, a large number of voters with temporary residence, and differences or inconsistencies in identity and residence documents. These factors make the voter verification process relatively complex during the special review of electoral rolls, resulting in a significant change in the voter count. A more comprehensive analysis of the effects of these changes will be possible after the release of the final list. The SIR process in the state lasted for a total of 62 days and was extended three times. Initially, this process was to be completed on December 11, 2025, then under the first extension until December 26, 2025, then December 31, 2025, and finally the deadline was extended until January 6, 2026. With the release of the draft list, a one-month period for claims and objections has begun. All those individuals who have submitted registration forms but whose connection could not be established with the 2003 list will be called for a hearing. They will have to present any one of the 11 documents prescribed by the Election Commission as proof of citizenship and residence. The Election Commission has provided an opportunity for objections and claims for deleted voters, which is an important stage of the electoral process. However, the success of this stage depends on how easy, transparent, and accessible the procedure is made. It is also important that the information and data available during this process are presented clearly to the public in order to maintain trust.
If the basic purpose of the special comprehensive review is the accuracy of electoral rolls and the stability of the democratic system, then ease, transparency, and consideration of ground realities in its procedure are inevitable. The purification of electoral rolls is a constitutional requirement, and at the same time, it is also necessary that the inclusion of eligible citizens remains unhindered. The real importance lies in the fact that electoral reforms are implemented in a way that strengthens citizen confidence and further strengthens democratic participation. The coming stage will determine to what extent this review can be made balanced and effective through the process of objections and corrections. If every eligible citizen gets an opportunity to participate in a timely and easy manner, then this process can prove to be a positive step for the democratic system.