Justice Ujjal Bhuyan warns mass voter deletion strikes at heart of Constitution

Supreme Court Justice Ujjal Bhuyan has launched a fierce critique of mass voter deletions, warning that stripping millions of Indian citizens of their right to vote is "intrinsically arbitrary" and cannot be defended.

Speaking in Hyderabad on Sunday, 4 October 2026, Justice Bhuyan said no amount of administrative justification or "whataboutery" could excuse an exercise that effectively turns citizens into second-class residents in their own country.

The judge's remarks, delivered at the NALSAR University of Law, arrive as the Election Commission of India faces intense legal and political pressure over its Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls. Across the country, the cleanup drive has led to the removal of lakhs of voters, sparked complaints over mechanically issued verification notices, and created an enormous backlog of appeals from disenfranchised citizens.

The scale of the electoral roll deletions

The scale of the purge is already before the courts. In Delhi, petitioners have told the Supreme Court that 47.56 lakh names were left off a draft electoral roll published on 31 August, while another 33.13 lakh electors were marked for notices due to "logical discrepancies" or unmapped addresses. The Supreme Court has demanded answers from the Election Commission about the basis of these notices.

The crisis is even more acute in West Bengal. The Election Commission recently admitted to the Supreme Court that out of 27.16 lakh voters deleted through adjudication, 22.21 lakh had filed appeals to be reinstated. Together with appeals challenging the wrongful inclusion of others, the state has a backlog of more than 37 lakh pending cases. To handle the deluge, the commission has proposed more than doubling its appellate tribunals from 19 to 42.

Why the right to vote is 'the soul' of citizenship

Against this backdrop, Justice Bhuyan warned that administrative convenience must not override the constitutional guarantee of adult suffrage.

"The Indian Constitution does not provide for two classes of citizens: citizens with voting rights and citizens without voting rights," he said. He argued that the right to vote, while not a fundamental right, is central to the basic structure of the Constitution and cannot be separated from the concept of citizenship.

Invoking a landmark 1995 Supreme Court ruling, Justice Bhuyan stressed that safeguards must be strictly followed. Except when a voter has died, a name already on the roll cannot be removed without first giving the citizen a formal notice and a fair hearing.

"From the persona of an Indian citizen, the right to vote or right to be included in the voters list cannot be detached," he said. "It will be like taking out the soul from the body."

No removal without a hearing

He reminded the audience of the Constituent Assembly's decision to trust every adult Indian with a vote, regardless of literacy or wealth, quoting BR Ambedkar's warnings about the contradiction of political equality alongside deep social and economic inequality.

In India, Justice Bhuyan said, the vote of a billionaire and a rickshaw puller carry the exact same weight, as do those of a privileged priest and a manual scavenger.

"No authority can do it; no court can condone it," he warned of any attempt to tinker with these rights. "No one is above the Constitution."