Syllabus: GS-II: Election

Why in the News?

In 2025, sharp allegations surfaced regarding attempts to delete the names of large numbers of registered voters without their knowledge in Aland constituency, Karnataka, ahead of the 2023 Assembly elections. 

More About the News

• It was claimed that over 6,000 deletion requests were filed via online portals under Form 7, many of which were allegedly fraudulent. 
• Investigations were initiated, including FIRs, after suspicion arose that deletion requests originated from outside the constituency and used EPIC numbers of unaware citizens. 
• The ECI has responded by clarifying that no name can be removed by just submitting an online request and emphasized the legal safeguards built into the deletion process.

Voter Name Deletion Process: What Happened in Aland in 2023?

• Between December 2022 and February 2023, in Aland (Kalaburagi, Karnataka), approximately 6,018 applications using Form 7 were submitted requesting deletion of voter names. 
• Many applications claimed reasons such as “shifted residence” or “duplicate entries.”
• On scrutiny, only 24 of those requests were found genuine; 5,994 were rejected as invalid/corrupt/fraudulent.
• The ECI confirmed that online submission of Form 7 is possible, but deletion is not automatic. 
• The process requires verification, a hearing, and an order by the Electoral Registration Officer (ERO). 
  • Notices are issued to the affected elector; the person must be given an opportunity to respond.
• An FIR was filed by the ERO in Aland following suspicion over large-scale Form 7 submissions.

Legal Provisions for Voter Deletion

• Under Section 22 of the Representation of the People Act, 1950, EROs have the power to correct electoral rolls. 
  • They may delete or amend entries, either suo motu or upon receiving applications.
• The Registration of Electors Rules, 1960 prescribes the use of Form 7 for objections to inclusion or deletion of names in electoral rolls. 
• This covers both self-deletion requests and objections against another voter’s inclusion or continued enrolment.
• In each case, they must conduct an inquiry, give the elector concerned time to respond and then pass an order.
• Reasons for the Removal of Name: Valid legal reasons include:
  • Death: Voter has died.
  • Change of residence: Voter has permanently shifted away from that constituency.
  • Underage / ineligible: Not yet 18, or no longer a citizen.
  • Duplicate Entry: Being enrolled more than once.
  • Non-Indian citizen status.

Applying for Voter Deletion

• Form 7 is the instrument used for requesting deletion or objecting to another’s enrollment. 
  • One can also use it to apply for deletion of one’s own name.
• The form requires: own details (name, EPIC number, address), details of the person whose name is to be deleted (if other), reason for deletion, signature/declaration.
• It can be submitted offline to Booth Level Officer (BLO) or ERO, or online via voter portal / ECINet / other apps, provided the applicant is registered in that constituency.
  

Filing Form 7 Online for Voter Deletion

• The online process involves: registering with an EPIC number, linking your phone number to that EPIC, choosing the deletion option, and filling necessary details.
• Once submitted, the application is acknowledged; then field verification (by BLO), notice to affected person, possible hearing, then decision by ERO.

Gaps in the Online Voter Deletion System

• Flood of incorrect/fraudulent applications: As seen in Aland, many Form 7 submissions were invalid but were still filed in large numbers.
• Verification delays & traceability issues: Authorities have been asked for IP logs, OTP trails etc. to trace source of applications, but either data not shared in time or incomplete, hindering investigations.
• Public confusion about online vs actual deletion: Many believe submitting online Form 7 causes automatic deletion; in reality deletion happens only after verification and due process.
• Access inequities: Not everyone has digital access or awareness. Some may be wrongly targeted but unaware of how to check.
• Potential political misuse: Claims that deletions may be targeted to influence electoral outcomes, especially in close constituencies. Allegations of submissions from outside constituencies.
  

Way Forward

• Better audit trails & transparency: ECI should regularly publish data on Form 7 deletion requests, reasons, number accepted vs rejected, and logs (IP, device) for higher scrutiny.
• Faster investigations: Provide required technical data (IP logs, device numbers, OTP verification) to investigation agencies promptly.
• Awareness drives & public notice requirement: Ensure affected voters are notified properly in language they understand; inform institutional redressal.
• Strengthen BLO / field verification capacity: More robust verification of residence, duplicate entries, death records etc.
• Stricter penalties for fraudulent deletion requests: False declarations under Form 7 are punishable, but enforcement needs strengthening.
• Digital security and identity verification upgrades: Multi-factor authentication when submitting online requests; use Aadhaar or other identity proofs with caution and within privacy norms.
  

Conclusion

The Aland episode has exposed vulnerabilities in the electoral roll deletion process — especially in online submission and verification. While the legal framework via the RP Act 1950 and Rules of 1960 is robust, gaps in implementation, verification, technical traceability and transparency undermine trust. Ensuring electoral integrity demands both legal safeguards and technological, institutional reforms. Without them, even legitimate procedures may be perceived as manipulations, damaging democracy.

Mains Practice Question

1. “The controversy over voter deletions in Aland points to both legal safeguards and structural gaps in India’s electoral roll management. Critically examine the deletion process and suggest reforms to ensure free, fair, and credible elections.” (250 words / 15 marks)

The Indian Express