UP SIR: Two poll officials suspended, FIRs ordered over Pilibhit voter roll irregularities

The Election Commission took disciplinary and legal action against two electoral registration officers in Uttar Pradesh. It ordered the suspension of Mayank Goswami and Hemant Chaudhary. It also directed that FIRs be filed against them and computer operator Anil Kumar. The officers cannot be reinstated without the Commission’s prior approval.

The action followed an investigation into Pilibhit Sadar’s electoral rolls. A computer assistant entered 13,779 Form 8 applications, which are used to correct voter details or shift addresses. However, investigators found no physical forms or supporting documents for the changes. The Commission also ordered Section 198 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita to be added to the FIRs.

The Commission sought a review report within a week. It also ordered Uttar Pradesh officials to re-examine voter lists, especially additions, deletions, and modifications made through Forms 6, 7, and 8. The case raised wider concerns about the reliability of the revision process.

An electoral roll is the official list of people registered to vote in a particular constituency. Election officials use it to identify voters and manage additions, deletions, and changes in voter records. Its accuracy matters because a person may face difficulty voting if their name or details are missing or wrong.

Form 8 is a request linked to an existing electoral-roll entry. It is used to correct details, such as information recorded incorrectly, or to shift a voter’s residence. In Pilibhit, investigators found that a computer assistant had entered 13,779 Form 8 applications. They found no physical forms or supporting documents to justify those changes.

The Commission therefore ordered officials across Uttar Pradesh to re-examine data entered through Forms 6, 7, and 8. These checks are intended to ensure that changes are based on genuine requests and evidence. The Pilibhit case shows why paperwork and review matter when voter records are altered.

The Pilibhit case involved several overlapping figures. Congress alleged that more than 13,000 voters’ names had been replaced after the final rolls were published. Uttar Pradesh’s chief electoral officer later said irregularities had been found in 10,470 entries after the special intensive revision.

A district investigation found that a computer assistant had entered 13,779 Form 8 applications. Form 8 is meant for correcting details in an existing record or shifting a voter’s residence. The investigation found no physical forms or supporting documents to support those supposed corrections. This created a clear mismatch between recorded changes and available evidence.

The figures prompted action beyond Pilibhit. The Election Commission ordered a review of the constituency’s rolls and directed all Uttar Pradesh district and electoral registration officers to re-examine their lists. They were told to focus especially on changes made through Forms 6, 7, and 8.

Voter records determine whose names appear on the electoral roll and therefore who can normally vote at a polling station. Wrongful deletions or substitutions can prevent genuine voters from participating. They can also create uncertainty about whether the final list accurately reflects the constituency’s electorate.

In Pilibhit Sadar, officials found irregularities in 10,470 entries, while Congress alleged that more than 13,000 names had been replaced. The investigation also found 13,779 Form 8 applications without physical forms or supporting documents. These changes could affect the roll even if the final effect on votes is not yet established.

The margin makes the issue politically important. BJP leader Sanjay Gangwar won the 2022 Assembly election by fewer than 7,000 votes. If wrongful changes affected enough eligible voters, they could exceed that margin and potentially influence the result. The article does not establish that this happened, but the Commission ordered reviews to assess the records.

Electoral registration officers are officials responsible for administering voter registration and maintaining electoral rolls within their areas. They oversee processes such as adding voters, deleting entries, and correcting or shifting records. In the article, the Election Commission held two such officers responsible enough to order their suspension and FIRs.

Computer assistants perform operational work under those offices. They work as operators at voter registration centres and enter applications and changes on the ECINET portal. The investigation found that a computer assistant in Pilibhit entered 13,779 Form 8 applications without physical forms or supporting documents. This illustrates the difference between oversight and data entry.

After the allegations, the chief electoral officer ordered the deactivation of login IDs for all computer assistants working on ECINET in Uttar Pradesh. The Election Commission also told officials to re-examine voter lists, especially changes made through Forms 6, 7, and 8. The article does not detail every officer’s formal legal power.

The Special Intensive Revision, or SIR, is an electoral-roll review exercise intended to check and update voter lists. The article says Uttar Pradesh was part of its second phase. Such a process matters because it can affect who appears on the final rolls before an election. The article says the exercise began in June 2025.

The review has faced questions about its manner and pace. Critics have worried that genuine electors could be removed and lose their right to vote. In Pilibhit, Congress alleged that more than 13,000 names were replaced, while the chief electoral officer reported irregularities in 10,470 entries. Investigators also found unsupported Form 8 entries.

The Supreme Court upheld the legality of the exercise in May, but said this did not allow the Election Commission to decide whether someone is an Indian citizen. Protests have continued since October 2 over alleged revision irregularities. The Commission has ordered further reviews and scrutiny of Uttar Pradesh rolls.

An electoral system protects participation by maintaining an accurate list of eligible voters and checking applications before entries are added or changed. It should verify identity and residence through the required records, detect duplicate or inconsistent entries, and keep an audit trail of decisions. These safeguards help prevent both wrongful inclusion and wrongful exclusion.

The article highlights why each step matters. In Pilibhit, 13,779 Form 8 applications were entered, but investigators found no physical forms or supporting documents. The Election Commission responded by ordering reviews and directing officials to examine additions, deletions, and modifications made through Forms 6, 7, and 8. These are examples of administrative checks.

A fair system must also allow affected people to see proposed changes, object, appeal, and correct mistakes before polling. That broader safeguard is a general electoral principle, not a specific procedure detailed in this article. The article’s immediate next steps are re-examination, reports, FIRs, and scrutiny by the Commission.