61,059 FORM 7 APPLICATIONS WITHOUT REASONS? INDIA MUST DEMAND ANSWERS FROM THE ELECTION COMMISSION! 🚨 YOUR VOTE IS YOUR RIGHT. NO VOTER SHOULD BE ERASED THROUGH AN OPAQUE PROCESS. A disturbing report from Karnataka has raised serious questions about the Election Commission of India’s Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls. According to The Hindu’s October 26 investigation, 61,059 Form 7 applications seeking voter deletions were filed by election officials without stating the reasons for the proposed deletions. Form 7 is used to object to a proposed inclusion or seek deletion of an existing electoral-roll entry on specified grounds. The reasons matter because they allow the objection to be examined and challenged. 🔴 WHAT THE REPORTS REVEAL 1. REASONS LEFT BLANK Electoral Registration Officers and Assistant Electoral Registration Officers reportedly told The Hindu that the forms were automatically generated with their digital signatures when voters could not be reached during hearings concerning mapping gaps or discrepancies. Officials said the system left the reasons blank. Automation may explain how the forms were generated. It does not, by itself, establish that the resulting process complied with the law. 2. A MASSIVE SURGE AFTER THE DEADLINE The report found that only 192 such applications were received between August 24 and September 23. More than 60,800 were filed between September 24 and October 22, after the claims-and-objections deadline. Rule 17 of the Registration of Electors Rules, 1960, requires objections submitted outside the prescribed period or not in the prescribed manner to be rejected. The legal treatment of these applications, and whether the applicable procedures were followed, must be explained. 3. NAMES REPORTEDLY ALREADY DELETED In the cases checked by The Hindu using electoral photo identity card numbers and the ECI portal, the voters’ names had already been removed, including cases where the corresponding applications were filed after September 23. This finding raises a fundamental question: How could a name reportedly be deleted before the corresponding Form 7 application was filed? The Commission must establish the chronology, legal basis and individual records. The sample findings warrant investigation; they do not establish that every one of the 61,059 cases was unlawful. 4. AN EARLIER ASSURANCE NEEDS RECONCILIATION On October 5, Karnataka’s Chief Electoral Officer V. Anbukkumar said that no voter had been deleted through the Form 7 process at that point and that applications would be examined through the prescribed procedure. The subsequent reporting raises questions that deserve a clear, documented response. The ECI must explain what changed, when deletions occurred, what notices were served, and whether every affected voter received the legally required opportunity to respond. 5. WHO IS ACCOUNTABLE FOR AUTOMATED DECISIONS? An automatically generated form cannot become a substitute for lawful scrutiny. If a computer system produces a deletion request, officials must still establish the legal grounds, follow the required procedure and ensure that eligible voters are not wrongly removed. Technology should strengthen electoral integrity—not obscure responsibility. ⚖️ OUR DEMANDS ✅ Publish a transparent, constituency-wise account of the 61,059 applications and their present status. ✅ Explain why the reasons were left blank and identify who authorised the automated process. ✅ Disclose the legal basis and chronology for deletions reportedly made before the corresponding applications. ✅ Verify that all required notices, hearings and orders were issued and that affected voters had a meaningful opportunity to respond. ✅ Conduct an independent examination of the records, software workflow and discrepancies in official application totals. ✅ Restore eligible voters’ names promptly wherever wrongful deletion is established, with an accessible remedy for every affected citizen. 🇮🇳 THE ELECTION COMMISSION MUST PROTECT THE VOTER, NOT ASK THE VOTER TO TRUST AN UNEXPLAINED SYSTEM. The right to vote is central to representative democracy. Every deletion must have a lawful basis, a documented process and an effective remedy. This is not about defending one political party or accusing another without proof. It is about ensuring that electoral procedures are fair, transparent and equal for everyone. If the process was lawful, publish the evidence. If errors occurred, correct them. If violations are established, ensure accountability under the law. NO INVISIBLE DELETIONS. NO UNEXPLAINED EXCLUSIONS. EVERY ELIGIBLE VOTER COUNTS. SOURCE / SUPPORTING REPORTS: The Hindu investigation, October 26, 2026 — report on 61,059 Form 7 applications filed without recorded reasons. Coverage: Scroll, “Karnataka poll officials sought deletions of 61,000 names without citing reasons.” scroll.in/latest/1096646/sir… The Indian Express — “Karnataka SIR: Form 7 submissions surged from 58,475 to 2.28 lakh in 1 month, shows data.” indianexpress.com/article/ci… The News Minute — Karnataka CEO’s October 5 assurance that no voter had been deleted through Form 7 at that stage. thenewsminute.com/karnataka/… Social media discussion and video: VIZHPUNEET (@vizhpuneet) #DimaagiNaxal #Resistance #UnitedResistance