Why has Election Commission of India suddenly gone on a concession spree?

Why is ECI restoring Delhi voters with fewer checks and agreeing to share machine-readable rolls after years of refusing?

ECI announces a Special Summary Revision after skipping the annual exercise in 2025 and 2026.

Delhi voters flagged for inconsistencies get fresh scrutiny as allegations of irregularities emerge in other states.

Opposition criticism and judicial scrutiny raise questions over the timing of the Commission's concessions.

The Election Commission of India (ECI) this week announced a special summary revision (SSR) of electoral rolls, with 1 January 2027 as the qualifying date, after skipping the annual exercise in 2025 and 2026. The move followed criticism that the ECI was deliberately obstructing the enrolment of younger, first-time voters, even as older voters excluded during the special intensive revision (SIR) were being encouraged to fill out Form 6 as new voters to get back on the rolls.

The ECI introduced several procedural relaxations and clarifications after criticism of the SIR process intensified and petitions reached the Supreme Court. The court has repeatedly examined issues relating to transparency, voter deletions, restoration mechanisms and changes to Form 6. It specifically clarified that it had neither adjudicated upon nor approved the modified Form 6, contrary to what the ECI had claimed.

That is not all. The ECI has agreed to provide political parties with soft copies of electoral rolls in a readable format, a demand it had rejected since at least 2018, when the Congress approached the Supreme Court over the issue in vain. It has also agreed to share details of additions, deletions and modifications with political parties, provide readable electoral rolls to contesting candidates, and share weekly lists of claims and objections with political parties.

.Turn approver; you're not the mind behind your mistake: Rahul to Gyanesh. The ECI has also proactively come to the rescue of 33 lakh voters in New Delhi who were flagged by software for logical inconsistencies. Instead of subjecting them to personal hearings and asking them to submit proof of identity, age and nationality, the Commission has decided that booth-level officers (BLOs) will visit their homes to scrutinise their details -- something they were required to do during their three mandated visits before publication of the draft roll. The ECI claims that 20 lakh voters in Delhi flagged for inconsistencies have already been restored to the rolls at record speed.

Why have voters in Delhi received this special treatment while voters in other states have been denied the same? In West Bengal, the ECI has found a convenient excuse in the fact that 37 lakh appeals against additions -- filed by the ECI itself, for the first time -- remain pending before appellate tribunals and are therefore sub judice . What about the other states?

.'Why is Gyanesh Kumar so important to Modi?' CJP's Dipke asks at press meet. The Reporters' Collective , in a series of reports over the past several days, exposed how ECI software had automatically generated 85,854 forms seeking voter deletions without assigning any reason in. Uttar Pradesh.

The state's chief electoral officer described the report as baseless and misleading. When the Collective produced evidence in a follow-up report, the CEO confirmed its findings. He also confirmed attempts at bulk deletion of Muslim voters. When contacted by media, the CEO dismissed the discrepancies as "minor errors and glitches" and complained that the Collective had not given the Commission enough time.

The CEO, the Collective reported, has not explained how more than 80,000 voters could have been marked for deletion without any reason or with single letters of the alphabet -- A, B or C -- recorded as reasons. Neither the CEO nor the Commission has filed an FIR against those who allegedly attempted mass deletions. Nor has the Commission explained how non-existent people, such as 'Reshma', flagged by the Collective , were allowed to submit requests for mass deletions.

. No explanation has been forthcoming on similar allegations in other states, including Gujarat, Karnataka and Uttarakhand. The ECI clearly has much to answer for. What, then, explains the flurry of concessions in recent days?

The most plausible explanation is that the ECI, under pressure and judicial scrutiny, is attempting to blunt the allegations against it. The Supreme Court has issued notice on a petition filed by INDIA bloc leaders led by Lok Sabha Leader of Opposition Rahul Gandhi. The concessions appear to be a pre-emptive attempt to prepare a defence before the matter comes up before the court.

Critics argue that if these relaxations were possible now, they could have been introduced earlier. Their belated implementation strengthens the impression that the Commission has acted under legal pressure.