Karnataka SIR | PIL Alleges 67 Lakh Voters Face Deletion Without Notice; High Court Seeks Clarification On SC Directions
The Karnataka High Court on Monday (July 27) heard a Public Interest Litigation challenging the Election Commission of India's (ECI) Special Intensive Revision (SIR) in the State, on the alleged ground that nearly 67 lakh voters face exclusion from the electoral rolls without any notice or opportunity to be heard.The bench of Chief Justice Vibhu Bakhru and Justice K.S. Hemalekha...
The Karnataka High Court on Monday (July 27) heard a Public Interest Litigation challenging the Election Commission of India's (ECI) Special Intensive Revision (SIR) in the State, on the alleged ground that nearly 67 lakh voters face exclusion from the electoral rolls without any notice or opportunity to be heard.
The bench of Chief Justice Vibhu Bakhru and Justice K.S. Hemalekha sought clarification on the petitioners' reliance on the Supreme Court's directions governing the revision exercise and posted the matter for tomorrow.
The petition has been filed by noted historian and writer Dr. Ramachandra Guha, veteran activist Devanura Mahadeva, Major General (Retd.) S.G. Vombatkere, and Ex- Vice Chancellor of Akkamahadevi Univeristy Sabiha Bhoomigowda, seeking directions to the ECI to modify its guidelines for the SIR.
Senior Advocate Vikram Huilgol, appearing for the petitioners, submitted that nearly 67 lakh voters in Karnataka presently fall under the ASDDO (Absent, Shifted, Dead, Duplicate and Others) category, a figure expected to increase to 80 lakh, and alleged that voters in these categories face exclusion from the electoral rolls without any notice or opportunity to be heard, contrary to principles of natural justice.
"The Supreme Court has clearly held that no voter should be excluded without due process. Yet, voters in these categories are being deleted without any communication or opportunity to respond," Huilgol submitted.
The petitioners also contended that the 'Others' category is undefined and subjective, and sought directions to the ECI to clearly define the category and ensure that no elector is deleted without communicating recorded reasons in writing.
It was further submitted that the Karnataka Government had written to the ECI on June 15, 2026, raising similar concerns but had received no response.
The petition challenges the ECI's Order No. 23/2026-ERS (Vol. II) dated July 15, 2026, contending that the timeline prescribed for the SIR exercise is inadequate and seeking extension of each phase from one month to three months.
The plea also raises concerns regarding voters being flagged under the 'logical discrepancy' category without prior notice, and seeks publication of objective criteria governing such classification.
It also seeks establishment of voter facilitation centres at every polling booth and opposes denial of welfare benefits based on exclusion from the revised electoral rolls.
During the hearing, Huilgol submitted that the Karnataka notification was based on the SIR guidelines issued for Bihar and argued that the ECI had failed to implement the Supreme Court's directions requiring due process before deletion of voters.
The Bench, however, sought clarification regarding the Supreme Court judgment stating,
“…You are referring to Paragraph 13 of the guidelines [pre-filled enumeration form to be submitted by voters before July 25, 2025 to avoid automatic exclusion from draft electoral rolls]. But where is 5A [mentioned in the para 135 of the apex court's judgment in 2026] being referred to in the Guidelines? It can't be different guidelines. What is 5A and 5B being referred to [in SIR Guidelines]?”
Case Title: Devanura Mahadeva & Ors. v. Election Commission of India & Ors.
Case No: WP 22330/2026