In a significant development that raises serious questions about the integrity of the ongoing Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of voter rolls in Delhi, prominent civil society petitioners Anjali Bhardwaj and Amrita Johri have written an urgent letter to the Chief Election Commissioner and the Chief Electoral Officer (CEO) of Delhi, demanding an immediate investigation into allegations of widespread forgery and identity fraud involving Form 7 deletion applications in the Mustafabad constituency.
The letter, addressed to Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar, Election Commissioners Dr. Sukhbir Singh Sandhu and Dr. Vivek Joshi, and CEO Delhi Ashok Kumar, comes in the wake of a news report published by The Hindu on November 5, 2026, titled "Delhi SIR: several BJP BLAs named as 'objectors' deny filing Form 7s in Mustafabad area."
Citing the investigative report, the petitioners—who are also petitioners in Writ Petition (Civil) 1188/2026 in Anjali Bhardwaj & Anr. vs Election Commission of India & Anr.—highlighted alarming irregularities in the SIR process. According to the report, out of 1,021 deletion applications filed, at least 787 Form 7 applications—accounting for 94% of third-party deletion requests—were submitted in the names of 20 BJP-appointed Booth-Level Agents (BLAs).
All the applications were reportedly directed against Muslim electors. Upon verification, The Hindu reported that 16 of these 20 individuals denied filling, signing, or having any knowledge of these forms, indicating that their identities appear to have been forged and used fraudulently without their consent.
"The report raises serious concerns about possible systematic and fraudulent attempt to disenfranchise legitimate electors through the deliberate misuse of statutory procedures and warrants investigation," the letter states.
The petitioners have urged the Election Commission of India (ECI) and the CEO, Delhi, to take immediate cognizance of the matter and initiate a series of actions to safeguard the electoral process. In their communication, Bhardwaj and Johri have demanded the registration of police complaints and FIRs under relevant provisions of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), including for forgery, criminal impersonation, identity fraud, and submission of false declarations.
They have also sought a comprehensive audit of every Form 7 submitted across all constituencies in Delhi during the SIR to verify whether the listed objectors actually authorized and signed the forms. After investigation, they have urged the enforcement of strict statutory action under Section 31 of the Representation of the People Act, 1950, against all persons who knowingly submitted false or fabricated declarations in Form 7.
Further, the petitioners have demanded that all deletion proceedings originating from third-party Form 7 applications be immediately stayed until independent verification with the affected electors and listed objectors is completed. They have also sought the release of a public report disclosing the total number of Form 7 applications received, verified as genuine, or found to be fraudulent to maintain public trust in the electoral process, as well as the publication of all Form 7 deletion applications received during the SIR on the website of the CEO, Delhi, to enable people to check and verify whether such forms have been fraudulently submitted in their names.
Describing the situation as a "grave threat to voter rights," the petitioners emphasized that "an immediate and transparent response is imperative." The letter is signed by Anjali Bhardwaj and Amrita Johri, who are identified as petitioners in the Writ Petition (Civil) 1188/2026 and IA No. 317050/2026 in Anjali Bhardwaj & Anr. vs Election Commission of India & Anr.
The allegations, if proven true, represent one of the most serious challenges to the credibility of the electoral revision process in recent memory. The scale of the alleged fraud—787 forms in the names of just 20 individuals, 16 of whom deny any knowledge—points to a coordinated attempt to weaponize statutory procedures against a specific community. The Election Commission now faces mounting pressure to act decisively. With the SIR process ongoing and deletion proceedings potentially continuing, the call for an immediate stay on third-party Form 7 applications until independent verification is completed is particularly urgent.
Fresh Relief for Excluded Voters?
Meanwhile, following the letter to ECI, the petitioners there was a new Election Commission communication issued on November 6 that appeared to provide some window for voters excluded from the draft rolls during the Special Intensive Revision (SIR).
The new ECI communication, addressed to the Chief Electoral Officers of Delhi, Maharashtra, Haryana, Andhra Pradesh, Jharkhand, Telangana and Nagaland, follows the Supreme Court's October 28 observation that it was an "error" to force pre-existing voters deleted from the rolls under the Absent, Shifted, Dead or Duplicate (ASDD) categories to apply as new voters through Form 6. The Court had orally directed that such voters should be allowed to fill an enumeration form or Form 8, which is used by existing electors to report a change of residence. Under the new directions, voters on the ASDD list who had shifted residence can fill an enumeration form along with a statement detailing their new address, while homeless persons can be verified by Booth Level Officers; those who missed the enumeration deadline can submit their forms now with a statement explaining the delay; and all such voters will be re-assigned their old EPIC numbers and parked for inclusion in the final voter list following due verification. The Commission has also directed wide publicity through media, social media and WhatsApp, and asked officials to establish a monitoring mechanism to ensure no eligible elector is deprived of inclusion while preventing duplicate enrolments.
The petitioners welcomed the communication, calling it "an important step in addressing large scale exclusions caused during SIR." They emphasized that the provision to re-assign old EPIC numbers is particularly significant as it ensures the preservation of a voter's historical record of being an existing elector. Just in Delhi, out of 47.56 lakh voters deleted in the first phase and placed on the ASDD list, 31.59 lakh were marked as "permanently shifted" and 11.73 lakh as "absent/untraceable," according to official data.
The Supreme Court had observed that requiring such people to fill Form 6 with its declaration of being a first-time voter was an error, and the petitioners urged the CEO of Delhi and all other states to take immediate steps to operationalise these critical directions.
The ECI's November 6 communication represents a significant shift in the Commission's approach, coming days after the Supreme Court on November 4 heard urgent submissions from the petitioners that the ECI was still insisting on Form 6 despite the Court's October 28 observations, leaving excluded voters "in the horns of a dilemma" between misrepresenting themselves as new applicants and risking prosecution. The matter is listed for further hearing on November 19.
Observers say the Commission's new directions will be closely watched to see whether they effectively address the scale of exclusions that occurred during the first phase of the SIR, even as the separate controversy over the alleged forgery of Form 7 applications in Mustafabad continues to demand urgent investigative attention.
Comments