Two senior Congress leaders from Surat have approached the Gujarat High Court challenging the ongoing Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls in the state, alleging widespread irregularities, arbitrary deletions of voters’ names, and violations of statutory procedures.
The special civil application was filed on February 10 by Vipulkumar Udhnawala, Surat district Congress president, and Vinod Patil, chief organiser of the Seva Dal in Surat. The matter is expected to be heard shortly by a bench comprising Justice Bhargav Karia and Justice L.S. Pirzada.
The Election Commission commenced the SIR exercise on November 4, 2025, concluding it on December 14. Following this, the draft electoral rolls were published on December 19, showing a drastic drop of nearly 74 lakh voters — from 5.08 crore to 4.34 crore electors across Gujarat.
According to the petitioners, this large-scale deletion occurred without adherence to mandatory procedures under the Registration of Electors Rules, 1960. The petition names the Chief Electoral Officer (CEO) for Gujarat, the District Electoral Officer of Surat, and Electoral Registration Officers (EROs) of various assembly constituencies as respondents.
- Bulk Objections Without Proof: The petition alleges that BJP workers have submitted bulk objections in Form-7 without requisite documentary evidence, violating Rule 13(2) which requires such objections to be submitted individually and by post.
- Violation of Procedure in Maintaining Records: The authorities have allegedly failed to maintain and exhibit lists of claims and objections in Form-11 as required under Rules 15 and 16. This omission deprives voters of transparency and their right to respond.
- No Opportunity to Be Heard: Under Rule 17, objections not filed in the prescribed manner are liable to be rejected. However, the petitioners claim that even such defective objections are being entertained and acted upon without serving notice or granting affected voters a chance to be heard — a clear violation of principles of natural justice and Rule 21A.
- Supreme Court Precedent Ignored: The plea invokes the Supreme Court’s decision in Lal Babu Hussein & Others v. Electoral Registration Officer & Others, highlighting that once a name appears on the draft roll, a legal presumption of citizenship arises, and the burden of proof lies on the objector. The petitioners allege this principle is being ignored.
The Congress leaders have urged the High Court to:
- Direct authorities to reject all claims or objections not filed in compliance with Rules 13 and 14.
- Mandate strict exhibition of Form-11 lists of claims and objections.
- Initiate legal action under Section 31 of the Representation of the People Act, 1950, and Sections 216 and 217 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS) against those filing false objections.
- Stay further proceedings in the SIR process until the matter is adjudicated.
The petition also mentions that a notice dated January 24 was served to the respondents, followed by a formal representation by Gujarat Congress president Amit Chavda on January 29, raising similar concerns. However, no action was reportedly taken, prompting the current legal action.
