While the attack by Israel and US on Iran is occupying the media headlines, about 60 lakh people in West Bengal must be having sleepless nights as their cases for continuation in the voter list are under judicial adjudication following the special intensive revision of rolls.In an earlier article, we had raised the issue of strong likelihood of the large-scale exclusions of genuine citizens. We analysed the gap between the number of electors and the eligible projected population (ERP) in the final rolls for Bihar ,and the then draft rolls of eight other major states. The Election Commission of India (ECI) is itself expected to ascertain the health of electoral rolls by analysing this gap constituency-wise, as per its Manual on Electoral Rolls, 2023. We do not know if ECI has been serious about this. State-wise deletionsThe final voter lists of eight major states (except Uttar Pradesh), have now been released after the SIR. Reason-wise deletion of voters in the draft rolls and a comparison of the latest Electoral Recorded Percentage (ERP) are shown in the Table below. Table: Deletion of Electors (in lakh) and ERPs in major States State Reason of deletionERP (%) Shifted/Absentee (includes missing) Deceased Duplicate at draft stage Final Bihar36.0022.007.0089.790.3Chhattisgarh 19.146.421.7986.487.5Gujarat 51.8618.073.8181.782.8Kerala 14.626.501.3691.897.3Rajasthan 29.608.753.4489.391.3Tamil Nadu 66.4426.943.3990.594.3Uttar Pradesh 217.0046.2325.4777.9AwaitedWest Bengal 32.0024.171.3892.183.8Madhya Pradesh 31.518.462.7788.589.9Source: Various State CEO portals and media reports of different dates. Combined ERP of these nine states, based on draft roll of Uttar Pradesh and actuals of others, is 86.1%. Except Kerala and Tamil Nadu, increases in ERPs, from draft roll levels, are only marginal. West Bengal’s ERP has in fact deteriorated substantially and even if all the 60 lakh cases under adjudication are finally included in voter list, its ERP would still be lower than that in draft roll. What is pertinent is that ERPs in each of these states continue to be generally much below 100%. Is it possible that all the remaining eligible voters have shifted to those states where SIR is yet to be held? Only time will answer this question.Deletion of voters on account of death and duplication is justified. But deletion of a large number of persons on account of other reasons like shifting to another place should be a cause of serious concern. We examine the reason for majority of deletions on account of shifting and being absent from one’s place of original residence. Statutory provisions and ECI guidelines on absentee votersSection 20(1A) of Representation of the People Act (RPA) 1950 stipulates that a person absenting themselves temporarily from their place of ordinary residence shall not, by reason thereof, cease to be ordinarily resident therein.ECI defines an absentee voter as one who is found to be absent for a limited period from place of their ordinary residence where they are enrolled as an elector. But temporary absence from place of ordinary residence will not deprive a person of the qualification of ordinary residence, if they possesses ability to return and has intention to return to that place, according to paragraph 8.3 of the Manual.A shifted voter is an elector who has left his place of ordinary residence and gone to some other place and there is no possibility of their returning back to the place. Such names may be deleted from electoral roll after following laid down process. ‘Ordinarily resident’In terms of Section 19 of the RPA, persons not less than 18 years of age, not barred by law and ordinarily resident in a constituency, are entitled to be registered in the electoral roll for that constituency. The requirement of being ‘ordinarily resident’, besides facilitating participatory democracy, precludes fake or duplicate voters. However, the very concept of ‘ordinary residence’ has not been defined clearly anywhere in the statutes. Neither the Union government nor the ECI has made any rule on the subject. ECI itself recognises in paragraph 8.8 of the Manual that all cases can neither be dealt with in an identical manner nor can any uniform rule be laid down to define ‘ordinary residence’. The concept of ordinary residence, combined with elector’s ability and intention to return to that place, is the supreme consideration for inclusion in the electoral rolls in any given constituency. No instruction under SIR has countermanded these overarching considerations. The case of Bihar’s migrant workers For Bihar, constituency-wise numbers of persons listed as migrated were published in January 2024, January 2025 and September 2025. Amongst those migrated, there is not even a single instance where the person migrated with their entire family. Is it tenable to argue that all these persons intended to permanently shift, leaving their families behind? In our view, absence of multiple voting cards itself proves their intent of not shifting permanently from the place of original residence. It is possible that some voters have been deleted on their own request but the details of such persons are not available in the public domain.DiscussionFrom the statutory provisions and guidelines, it is evident that names from the voter list cannot be deleted on ground of mere absence during SIR, unless it is established that the person has neither the intention nor ability to return to his original place or that they have been registered elsewhere. This fact of intent can be ascertained from the person concerned alone. It is clear that the ECI manual (page XVII) does not bar absentees from voting at a place where they are registered. However, to prevent impersonation of Absentee, Shifted and Dead (ASD) Voters, whose names should continue to appear in the electoral rolls, and the list of such ASD voters is to be prepared polling station-wise and provided to the concerned Presiding Officer. If any person listed in the ASD list turns up for voting, their identity has to be thoroughly verified before allowing them to vote.According to government data, more than 10 million people moved to their villages and towns when a complete nationwide lockdown was suddenly declared during COVID-19. This shows that people’s association with their village and hometown is not really broken by their residing at the place of their employment. There is absolutely no reason to deny them the right to have their name in the voter list of their original place of residence.Today the gap between the number of estimated eligible voters in these nine states and the number of electors on rolls is around 8.5 crore, including at least 4.5 crore deletions under shifted/absentee category. The ECI must introspect on the extent to which its avowed motto that no eligible voter is to be left out has been accomplished in the SIR. This is an electoral emergency which needs to be addressed with compassion and understanding, lest economic vulnerability of an already disadvantaged segment should also result in their political exclusion.Sanjay Kumar retired as Additional Director General of the the Ministry of Statistics & Programme Implementation. N. K. Sharma retired as Director General of the Ministry of Statistics & Programme Implementation. Siraj Hussain is former Union Agriculture Secretary.