Controversies regarding the authenticity of electoral rolls have arisen with regular frequency—both after the declaration of results as well as during the process of updating the rolls. Errors of both omission (when names that should have been on the list are excluded) and commission (when names that shouldn’t have been on the list are included) have been highlighted.
The Quality of Voter List studies conducted by the non-profit Janaagraha more than a decade and a half ago had pointed out errors of as much as 20 percent on many urban electoral rolls and close to 10 percent in several rural ones.
Such controversies surfaced once again after last year’s assembly elections in Maharashtra. The opposition alleged that a large number of names had been added to the voters’ list in select constituencies.
More recently, in West Bengal, allegations of duplicate election photo identity cards (EPIC) being issued were raised by the ruling party. The Election Commission promised a probe, especially in the light of its mandate to ensure that every EPIC is issued under a unique number.
In Tamil Nadu, too, there were complaints by voters at the time of the latest roll revision that names of family members who were no longer residing in their hometowns had been included.
Amid these controversies, there has been a renewed focus on the role of the Election Commission itself. In January 2025, when allegations emerged about the manipulation of electoral rolls in Delhi before the elections, the then Chief Election Commissioner Rajiv Kumar assured that the process of maintaining the electoral roll was transparent and due process was rigorously followed while deleting from or adding to voter lists, leaving no room for any manipulation.
After the 2024 Lok Sabha elections, a Lokniti-CSDS survey sought citizens’ responses on the amount of trust they had in the Election Commission. It showed a dramatic decline in trust at that point in time compared to five years earlier.
Just a little over a fourth of the respondents had a great amount of trust in the poll watchdog. In 2019, more than half the respondents had expressed similarly high trust. In 2024, close to a fourth had ‘not much trust’ or ‘no trust at all’ in this key institution; in 2019, just over one in every 10 respondents had expressed such a view. Those who had ‘some amount of trust’ in the commission were more or less consistent across the five years.
Onus on all sides
Transparency is a key element in conducting the crucial democratic process of voting. To ensure there are no errors of omission or commission in the voters’ list, all stakeholders need to exercise vigilance during the process of reviewing the rolls. On its part, the Election Commission should give due publicity to the exercise and give sufficient time for any stakeholder to raise objections to the entries introduced or deleted.
Political parties must use their ground-level workers to check and verify the list soon after it is published. Complaining once the results are announced seems an afterthought and legitimises the criticism that it’s a move to deflect from a defeat. Raising backed-up doubts soon after the publication of revised rolls would be a more appropriate approach. It’s also an indication of the preparedness and organisational presence of a party at the ground level. Further, civil society organisations that support fairness of the electoral process would also need to be actively involved in ensuring corrective measures.
Finally, the voters themselves reviewing the lists when published and verifying whether their family members are reported correctly is also important. The timely response of the authorities to any concerns expressed is vital for people to have faith in the fairness of the electoral process.
It may be useful at this point to focus on reports that suggest that the quantum of errors of omission and commission are significantly higher in urban areas than in rural ones. Further, the lower voter turnout in urban areas—take the examples of Bengaluru and Mumbai, as compared to the turnout in the hinterlands of the states they are a part of—is possibly due to this.
To zoom in on the case of Bangalore South and Bangalore Central Lok Sabha constituencies, one notices that in the last four elections (2009-24) the voter turnout has been in the range of 44-54 percent, which was much lower than the turnout in the other 26 Lok Sabha constituencies of the state.
After the 2024 Lok Sabha elections, Lokniti-CSDS did a study at a polling station that had one of the lowest voter turnouts. Fifty households with their names linked to this station were identified for a detailed survey. The survey team visited each of these households. And the number of voters listed for each of these households was verified.
What was interesting was that 30-50 percent of the names listed in the rolls were actually of those living outside Bengaluru—within the state, in other states or even abroad. They did not make the journey to vote. This boosted the numbers on the voters’ list, but led to the projection of a reduced turnout.
It was also found that many whose names were on the list in Bengaluru City were also registered to vote at other places—either in and around Bengaluru, or in other parts of the state. Many such voters preferred to vote in their hometowns because they had a greater interest in the political developments there.
All of this highlights the urgent need to clean up the electoral rolls and ensure that they reflect the current reality on the ground.
At the end of the day, the Election Commission plays a crucial role in building public confidence in the probity and fairness of the entire electoral process, and more specifically, in maintaining the sanctity of the electoral rolls. Making the process transparent and publicising the revised electoral rolls is also important. Ultimately, the commission has to ensure that there are no errors of either omission or commission.
(Views are personal)
Sandeep Shastri | National Coordinator of Lokniti Network, Director (academics) at NITTE Education Trust, and co-editor, Electoral Dynamics in the States of India