No voter left behind in West Bengal? Dinhata deletions raise questions

By A Representative 

A rights organisation has approached the Election Commission of India alleging large-scale and arbitrary deletion of voters from the electoral roll in West Bengal’s Dinhata Assembly Constituency, raising concerns over the disenfranchisement of former enclave residents who were granted Indian citizenship following the 2015 land boundary settlement with Bangladesh.

In a detailed representation dated April 1, Kirity Roy, Secretary of Banglar Manabadhikar Suraksha Mancha (MASUM), urged the Commission to intervene urgently, claiming that bona fide citizens—particularly those from erstwhile enclaves integrated into India under the Land Boundary Agreement 2015—have had their names removed from the electoral rolls without due process. The agreement, which operationalised the earlier Indira-Mujib Pact 1974, enabled enclave residents to opt for Indian citizenship and guaranteed them full civic and electoral rights.

The complaint centres on several cases from Purba Masaldanga, a former enclave in Cooch Behar district. According to MASUM, individuals such as Kamal Roy and Gita Barman—both recognised as Indian citizens during the post-2015 rehabilitation process—have found their names deleted from the rolls despite possessing valid identification and, in some cases, having voted in previous elections. The organisation stated that these deletions were carried out without issuing notice or providing an opportunity for hearing, in violation of established electoral procedures.

The representation also points to what it describes as a pattern of mass deletions in Booth No. 37 of the constituency. While the booth reportedly had over 1,200 registered voters in 2016, dozens of names were removed in revisions conducted in February and March 2026. MASUM’s fact-finding suggests that many of those affected are from marginalized communities, including members of the Rajbangshi Scheduled Caste population, where variations in surnames such as Roy, Ray, and Barman are common. The organisation has alleged that such minor discrepancies have been used as grounds for exclusion, leading to discriminatory outcomes.

Citing constitutional guarantees under Articles 14 and 326, the organisation argued that the removal of names on technical or clerical grounds undermines the principle of universal adult franchise and violates the Election Commission’s stated commitment that no eligible voter should be left behind. It also alleged that applications submitted by affected individuals for inclusion in the electoral roll have not been acted upon by local authorities, pointing to procedural lapses in the ongoing revision exercise.

MASUM has demanded immediate restoration of the deleted names, a time-bound inquiry into the matter, and a halt to further deletions in the affected segments until proper verification is completed. It has also called for clear directions to field-level electoral officials to ensure that former enclave residents are not excluded due to documentation inconsistencies.

The complaint comes amid heightened scrutiny of electoral roll revisions in border districts, where questions of citizenship documentation and administrative oversight have remained sensitive since the integration of enclaves into the Indian Union. The Election Commission has not yet issued a public response to the allegations.