Top court on SIRThe Supreme Court upholding the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls as the ‘Election Commission’s constitutional duty’ (Front page, May 28) is along expected lines. While deleting the names of illegal migrants may help cleanse the system, there have also been reports of genuine voters missing from the electoral rolls. Is the Election Commission not answerable for depriving genuine voters of exercising their franchise? Transparency is key, and all seeds of doubt must be dispelled.Balasubramaniam Pavani,SecunderabadIn any vibrant democracy, the sanctity of the electoral process rests upon the accuracy and integrity of the voters’ list. Such periodic scrutiny not only enhances electoral transparency but also fortifies public confidence in democratic institutions. Nevertheless, the process must be conducted with diligence and sensitivity so that no eligible citizen is disenfranchised owing to technical or procedural shortcomings. comprehensive public awareness, simplified verification procedures, and an effective grievance redress system are indispensable to achieving this objective.Nagarajamani M.V.,Hyderabad Published - May 29, 2026 12:24 am IST
Letters to The Editor — May 29, 2026
Readers' mail to The Hindu's Letters to The Editor
India's Supreme Court upheld the Election Commission's Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls as a constitutional duty, validating large-scale voter list purges targeting illegal migrants. Without robust verification and grievance redress mechanisms, the process risks disenfranchising eligible voters — a governance and transparency deficit.














