Over 1.28 lakh Form-7s filed just before SIR in Karnataka; 45,878 by third parties

A Form-7 application is a request to remove a name from an electoral roll. It helps election authorities keep voter lists updated when an elector has died, permanently shifted, or is otherwise no longer eligible. Because deletion affects voting rights, the request is meant to be checked before action is taken.

The Karnataka figures show why the form matters. More than 1.28 lakh Form-7 applications were filed before enumeration began. Of 45,878 third-party applications, 36,439 cited death and 6,775 cited absence or permanent shifting. These requests were made before voters’ details were checked through enumeration.

The article also reports concerns about procedure. It says thousands of names were deleted using auto-generated Form-7s digitally signed by Electoral Registration Officers, without written instructions or a stated notice period. Proper scrutiny is therefore central to keeping rolls accurate without wrongly removing eligible voters.

More than 1.28 lakh Form-7 applications seeking voter deletions were filed in Karnataka during the month before enumeration began. The applications arrived between the announcement of the SIR on May 14 and the freezing of the rolls on June 16. This made the scale important because the requests preceded the main verification exercise.

Third parties submitted 45,878 applications. That figure represented 35.6% of all deletion requests received during the period. Among them were 2,254 bulk applications filed by 112 objectors, each submitting at least 11 applications. Basamma filed 96, while Hanamant Calavadi filed 62.

Applications were concentrated in several areas. Belagavi recorded 38,713, Bagalkot 13,889, and Raichur 10,454. More than 28,441 applications came from Bagalkot, Belagavi North, Sindhanur, and Nippani. The figures show how deletion activity was distributed before enumeration began.

In the article, third-party applicants were people other than the electors concerned or election officials. They submitted Form-7 requests asking authorities to remove other people’s names from the electoral rolls. Their applications made up 35.6% of all deletion requests received between May 14 and June 16.

The most common reason was death. Of the 45,878 third-party applications, 36,439 used that reason. Another 6,775 cited “absent or permanent shifted.” The article also records large-scale filing by some individuals: Basamma from Sindhanur filed 96 applications, while Hanamant Calavadi from Bagalkot filed 62.

These figures mattered because the requests came before enumeration began. Voters’ details had not yet been checked through the enumeration process. The article also reports that Form-7s were auto-generated in some later deletions, with Electoral Registration Officers listed in place of objectors, and says no written standard procedure was shared with State authorities.

The timing was significant because the SIR’s enumeration phase was intended to check electors’ details. In Karnataka, Form-7 requests were filed before BLOs began distributing enumeration forms on June 30. Therefore, deletion requests were already being processed before the verification exercise could establish whether listed voters were present and eligible.

The article reports more than 1.28 lakh applications before enumeration began. In the week before the rolls were frozen, from June 10 to June 16, 20,671 applications were submitted. On the day the SIR was announced, May 14, 3,624 applications were filed. These numbers show that deletion activity preceded the formal enumeration process.

The concern was not simply volume. The article says the requests could be made before electors’ details were verified and reports auto-generated Form-7 deletions without a shared written procedure. It also says it remained unclear why applications were accepted before the SIR began, leaving the timing and safeguards under scrutiny.

A Special Intensive Revision, or SIR, is an electoral-roll exercise designed to verify and update the voter list. It matters because the roll should reflect eligible voters who can participate in elections. The article describes enumeration as the phase in which electors’ details were to be checked before the revised rolls were finalised.

In Karnataka, BLOs were scheduled to distribute enumeration forms from June 30. Form-7 requests could then support deletions involving people reported dead, absent, or permanently shifted. The article also frames the revision around identifying names that should not remain, including duplicate or otherwise ineligible entries, while verifying the information supplied by electors.

The process became controversial because more than 1.28 lakh deletion requests were filed before enumeration began. The article says this meant requests were made before electors’ details could be checked through enumeration. It also reports auto-generated Form-7s and says no written standard operating procedure was shared with State Electoral Officers.

Deleting a name without proper safeguards can prevent an eligible voter from voting. The person may discover the problem only when checking the roll or reaching a polling station. If many names are removed incorrectly, whole communities or constituencies may be underrepresented, weakening the connection between voters and elected institutions.

The article highlights the procedural risk. More than 1.28 lakh Form-7 applications were filed before enumeration began, and third parties submitted 45,878. It also reports deletions using auto-generated Form-7s digitally signed by Electoral Registration Officers, with no notice period in the described process. Those steps can make it difficult for affected electors to know about or contest a deletion.

The article says no written communication or standard operating procedure was shared with State election authorities for these auto-generated forms. That raises the importance of clear notice, evidence checks, and an opportunity to respond. Without them, accurate roll revision can become an unreviewed loss of voting access.

Electoral rolls are the basic record of who can participate in an election. Eligibility checks help keep that record accurate by identifying deaths, permanent shifts, duplicate entries, and other problems. Correction and challenge procedures add accountability, so a name is not removed solely because someone else made an unsupported request.

The Karnataka case shows why these protections matter. Third parties filed 45,878 deletion applications, including requests citing death or permanent shifting. More than 1.28 lakh applications arrived before enumeration began, and the article reports auto-generated forms and deletions without a notice period. These circumstances make verification and an opportunity to respond especially important.

When eligible voters remain on the roll, elected bodies better reflect the people they represent. When names disappear without due checks, participation and representation can be distorted. The article says no written standard procedure was shared with State authorities for the auto-generated forms, underscoring the need for transparent, consistent safeguards.