Rajya Sabha MP Kapil Sibal has raised concerns over alleged bulk deletion requests during the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls in Jharkhand. His remarks followed an Indian Express investigation from Godda district, which reported that BJP-linked Booth Level Agents had submitted multiple Form 7 applications seeking deletion of voters, with many of the names reportedly belonging to Muslims. Sibal alleged that the exercise could lead to voter-list manipulation and asked the Supreme Court to intervene. These allegations have triggered fresh political debate over the ongoing revision process.What Happened In Jharkhand?The controversy centres on several booths in Godda where Booth Level Officers raised objections to bulk Form 7 applications submitted by BJP-linked booth agents. According to the investigation, many of the voters named in these requests were from the Muslim community and some had been present in earlier electoral records. Election officials, however, have stressed that deletion requests must go through the prescribed verification process.The issue was reported from Godda district in Jharkhand.Several Form 7 applications reportedly sought voter deletions.Many names mentioned in the applications were Muslim voters.Some Booth Level Officers questioned the authenticity or procedure of the forms.The Jharkhand Chief Electoral Officer said bulk objections can be submitted under the rules.Godda Reports Raise ConcernsThe Indian Express investigation examined four booths in Godda — Maheshtikri, Pachua Kita, Lochni and Baghakol. At Maheshtikri, one BJP Booth Level Agent reportedly submitted 25 forms, while another agent at a neighbouring booth reportedly arrived with around 75 applications. A Booth Level Officer said the names in the latter batch were almost entirely Muslim voters.The report also said some voters targeted through the applications had lived in their villages for generations and were present in the 2003 electoral roll. One agent reportedly burned 75 forms after questions were raised about them. Local officials said field verification would be conducted for deletion requests before decisions are made.Sibal Calls For Court ActionSibal responded to the report on September 2, describing the allegations as a “politics of exclusion” and urging the Supreme Court to stop what he called bulk deletions. He also alleged that SIR was being used to manipulate voter lists to benefit the BJP. These are Sibal's political allegations and have not been established as a finding by the Election Commission or a court.The Jharkhand Chief Electoral Officer, K Ravi Kumar, said Form 7 objections can legally be submitted in bulk. He also said Booth Level Officers should not simply reject such forms and should instead inform the Assistant Electoral Registration Officer, who will decide the appropriate course of action.Key HighlightsKapil Sibal criticised the alleged bulk deletion requests in Jharkhand.The controversy emerged from Godda district during the SIR exercise.An Indian Express investigation reported that many targeted voters were Muslims.BLOs raised procedural concerns over some applications.Jharkhand's CEO said bulk Form 7 submissions are permitted.Officials said deletion requests must undergo the prescribed verification process.Verification Remains CrucialThe Jharkhand controversy has placed renewed attention on how voter objections are handled during SIR. The allegations involving BJP-linked agents, Muslim voters and bulk deletion requests remain subject to the official electoral process and verification. Sibal has called for judicial intervention, while election authorities have maintained that objections can be submitted under the rules. The final status of individual voters will depend on the verification and decision-making process by the competent electoral authorities.Disclaimer: This article is provided for knowledge and news-information purposes only. Allegations and political claims mentioned above are attributed to their respective sources and should not be treated as independently established facts unless confirmed by competent authorities.
