* Sukla Hazra, 55, has her name in the electoral roll of 2002, when an Intensive Revision was held by the Election Commission in West Bengal, and holds a passport valid till December 2028.* Amiran Begum Ali, 56, and daughters-in-law Arifa Begum Sheikh, 35, and Shahida Khatun, 29, all established links to the 2002 roll, including through her grandfather in the case of Shahida.* Subarna Mondal, 39, submitted the 2002 electoral roll that had names of both her parents as well as grandparents, and later her birth certificate, and her Class 10 admit card.Yet, Sukla, Amiran, Arifa, Shahida and Subarna have been deleted from West Bengal’s electoral roll because the Election Commission of India (ECI) has categorised them as entries that have a “logical discrepancy” — a criterion never used at this scale in the past.This despite the fact that all five of them can be mapped to the 2002 roll, a key pre-condition set by the ECI itself. As the clock ticks down to the polling days of April 23 and April 29, these three are illustrative cases among the lakhs who have been excluded from the state voter list.Read | Supreme Court says voters cleared by Tribunals till Apr 21 and 27 eligible to voteIn its latest order on Bengal’s drawn-out Special Intensive Revision (SIR) process, the Supreme Court directed that these 27.10 lakh be given one last chance, with the ECI directed to issue supplementary lists with those whose names are cleared by tribunals by April 21 (for the seats polling on April 23) and April 27 (for the April 29 phase).The ECI had identified these deletions on the basis of a centrally-controlled algorithm that picked out what it called “logical discrepancies”, after the draft roll under the SIR was published in December. The algorithm narrowed down 1.36 crore names in total, of which 60.06 lakh were placed under adjudication, with the rest disposed of in the notice period. Of these 60.06 lakh, 27.10 lakh were deleted after adjudication.Story continues below this adRead | Bengal SIR: Supreme Court to seek Calcutta HC Chief Justice’s report on Tribunals’ functioningKey to this is what the EC calls “logical discrepancy”. Some former chief election commissioners (CECs) and ex-ECs said this is “unprecedented”. Indeed, the ECI itself has been silent on it. When it issued its first order in June 2024 on an SIR for the whole country, starting with Bihar, and when it gave its directive three months later in October 2025 announcing that it would be held in 12 states/Union Territories, including Bengal, it made no mention of “logical discrepancies” as a criterion.Explained | What does the Supreme Court’s latest order mean for Bengal’s deleted votersIt was only in its written reply in January this year to the Supreme Court that the ECI said its Electoral Registration Officers had “generated notices for verification” of different types of “identified discrepancies”. It named these as: mismatch of an elector’s name in the current rolls with rolls prepared after the last intensive revision (2002, in the case of Bengal); an age gap less than 15 years or more than 15 years between an elector and their parent; an age gap less than 40 years between an elector and their grandparent; and, finally, six or more electors mapped as progeny of one person.An ex-CEC expressed surprise at these criteria, saying there was “no basis” for them. “The SIR process does not provide for this. It is illogical. All along, the idea has been to be as inclusive as possible,” said the ex-CEC, who did not wish to be named.Former EC Ashok Lavasa said: “The ECI has in the past used a de-duplication software (to check voter lists), but the suspected duplicate names identified through that were flagged to the ERO concerned, the elector was given a notice, a hearing was held and there was time to appeal. There was a timely redressal mechanism for the affected person.”Story continues below this adBut in the case of Bengal, Lavasa said, “the electors deleted have not been accorded an opportunity to appeal in time before the elections”. “It amounts to taking away their rights unfairly, because of bureaucratic inefficiency.”Ex-CEC O P Rawat said even if one person gets left out due to wrongly identified “logical discrepancies”, it was “very serious”. “It punctures the whole idea of the SIR. We must remember that the ECI’s motto has been ‘no voter to be left behind’,” he said.Incidentally, in Bihar too, some names appeared to have been flagged by the ECI’s centrally-controlled software, resulting in deletion of 9,968 voters without explanations given in the case of the others — largely deaths, being absent or having shifted to other places. The ECI itself did not release any information or data regarding these 9,968 deleted names.The poll panel remains similarly tight-lipped on its “logical discrepancies” algorithm in operation in Bengal.Story continues below this adThe Indian Express tracked down voters who have valid government documents, are mapped to the 2002 roll, and yet find themselves deleted.While Bengal Chief Electoral Officer Manoj Agarwal was unavailable for comment, asked about these cases, a senior official of the ECI said: “All adjudication cases were seen by judicial officers. We have no say regarding their judgment. In some cases, those who took documents during hearings, whether they properly handled the documents or not, will be subject to investigation.”All these 10 cases are of applicants and their family members in constituencies which vote in the second phase of Bengal polls, on April 29. This means they have time till April 27 to be included in voter lists: Sukla Hazra, 55Sukla Hazra, 55; Behala Paschim constituencyLogical discrepancy cited in notice: Age difference between elector and parent is more than 50 yearsDocuments: Hazra says that during the SIR, she submitted the 2002 electoral roll which had her name, and at the hearing, gave a copy of her passport that is valid till December 2028.Story continues below this adWhat may have happened: Hazra says she had applied to have her voter ID corrected around five years ago, since her old ID, issued in August 2007, spelled her name as “Shukla”. But while the new ID, which she received in March 2020, had the spelling of her name right, it got her birth date wrong: instead of 1970, it said January 1, 1994.Says Hazra: “With that, obviously my father’s age became 50 years more than mine. It is their mistake, but I have been running pillar to post… When I got the notice (regarding this issue), I submitted everything I had, both the new and old voter IDs, my passport with the correct date of birth, the 2002 electoral roll again, my husband’s PPO (Pension Payment Order, as a retired Ministry of Defence employee), and even the invitation card to my wedding in 1993.”Adds the 55-year-old: “How could I have been born in 1994 when I was married in 1993?”*** Manuyara Bibi, with husband. (Express photo by Partha Paul)Manuyara Bibi, 36; Bishnupur constituencyLogical discrepancy cited in notice: Linked to someone who has been “mapped” as a parent by six other people.Documents: Manuyara says she submitted the 2002 electoral roll which had the names of both her parents.Story continues below this adWhat may have happened: Manuyara says she filled in her father’s details, complete with his serial number in the 2002 electoral roll, in the SIR form. But she got notice to appear for a hearing, where she was told that six other people had named her father as their parent. So, she says, she submitted the 2002 electoral roll again, along with her Aadhaar card and an identity card issued to her under a state government scheme for unorganised sector workers.Says Manuyara: “I gave the 2002 electoral roll with my parents and documents of my siblings at the hearing. They didn’t say anything; they just took the documents. I am one of six siblings, so what?”*** Hidaytulla Sk, 39Logical discrepancy cited: Parent ‘mapped’ to 6 others.Hidaytulla Sk, 39; Katwa constituencyLogical discrepancy cited in notice: Parent “mapped” to six other applicants.Documents: Hidaytulla says he submitted the 2002 electoral roll with his mother’s name.Story continues below this adWhat may have happened: Hidaytulla, who works as a painter in Mumbai, says he came home when he found out that his name had been deleted in the SIR. He is one of seven siblings, and says some of his siblings submitted the same 2002 electoral roll as proof and weren’t deleted, while he was.Hidaytulla says he is under “a lot of tension”. “I haven’t slept or eaten properly for over a month now. I’m losing out on income too. When I have documents like the 2002 list, PAN card, Aadhaar card, my father’s Voter ID from 1995 and even land documents from almost 100 years ago, why have I been deleted?”He adds that five people in his family figure in the voter list. “But they don’t feel like voting this time either.”*** Subarna Mondal, 39Subarna Mondal, 39; Behala Purba constituencyStory continues below this adLogical discrepancy cited in notice: Unknown.Documents: Subarna says she submitted the 2002 electoral roll that had names of both her parents as well as that of her grandparents; her birth certificate; her Class 10 admit card and the marksheet.What may have happened: Subarna says her name figured in the final voter list after the SIR, but she found it deleted when a supplementary list was published on April 7 following adjudication. When she got notice for a hearing, she says she provided the additional documents.A single mother, Subarna has filed an appeal against the deletion. She also visited the institute in Joka, near Kolkata, where all the tribunals are sitting. But she has not got an update on her case.Adds Subarna: “My parents, grandparents, uncle and aunt were all on the 2002 list. I have my own Madhyamik admit card and marksheet, and also my father’s CGHS (Central Government Health Scheme) card, which has my parents, my siblings and my name on it.”In all this running around, she could not apply for a voter ID card for her son, who has just turned 20. “I thought if I have been deleted, how will he be able to register?… I’m a citizen; I pay my taxes. I will file a case in the High Court if I have to,” says Subarna.*** Interfaith marriage couple Sainaj Begam along with her husband Sekh Mujibar. (Express photo by Partha Paul)Sainaj Begum (previously Kalpana Manna), 30; Uluberia Uttar (SC) constituencyLogical discrepancy cited in notice: Mismatch with father’s name.Documents: Sainaj says she submitted the 2002 electoral roll with her father’s name, establishing her link to him.What may have happened: Sainaj says she was told at the hearing about the mismatch with her father’s name. “Our problem is unique. I willingly married Mujibar. I converted to Islam legally… I produced all the documents. But my name is still deleted. Is it because I converted to Islam?”On visiting the tribunals, Sainaj says: “I don’t know whether I will be allowed to meet the judges and plead my case. Also, that is in Joka, so far away. How will I go?”Her husband Mujibar, a wig maker who figures in the voting list, adds: “We have arranged for a lawyer to represent us at the tribunal. But I have heard they are not meeting deleted voters or their lawyers personally.”Sainaj worries for her two children. “With my name cut, what will happen to them?”*** Asadul Sheikh and Jamila are brothers and sisters. ((Express photo by Partha Paul))Asadul Sheikh, 43, sister Jamila, 30; Uluberia Uttar (SC) constituencyLogical discrepancy cited in notice: More than six people “mapped” to one father.Documents: Asadul and Jamila say they submitted the 2002 electoral roll with their father’s name.What may have happened: They are 13 siblings, says Asadul, and only his and Jamila’s names have been deleted.“All of us were called for a hearing as more than six reflected as children of my father in the logical discrepancy check. I went for the hearing and also represented Asadul, since he was in Gujarat. I gave all the documents, including the 2002 electoral roll and my father’s death certificate, among others. Now, while all my brothers and sisters are voters, two of us have been deleted,” says Jamila.Asadul, who works in the wig-making industry in Gujarat, says: “Why delete only two?… I have to return to work, my company is making frequent calls. I will lose my job.”*** Amiran Begam Ali, 56, her daughters-in-law Arifa Begum Sheikh, 35, Shahida Khatun, 29; Logical discrepancy cited: Name mismatch for all three. (Express photo by Partha Paul)Amiran Begam Ali, 56, daughters-in law Arifa Begum Sheikh, 35, and Shahida Khatun, 29; Uluberia Uttar (SC) constituencyLogical discrepancy cited in notice: Name mismatch for all three.Documents: Amiran says she submitted the 2002 electoral roll with her name on it. Arifa says her parents are both in the 2002 voter roll. Shahida “mapped” her name to her grandfather, who was in the 2002 roll, she says.What may have happened: With the rest of the family besides the three of them in the voter list, Amiran, a homemaker, suspects it was a change in name spelling that led to her deletion. Her old voter card spelled her name as Amiran Begam Ali. A few years back, she got a new voter card that only said Amiran Begam. However, how does this override the fact that she was in the 2002 voters’ list, Amiran asks.Arifa says in her case, the problem cited was that she was Arifa Begam Sheikh in some documents, and Arifa Begam in others, “We don’t know what to do.”Shahida said her parents were migrant workers, and her grandfather, who brought her up, is the only one she could “map” to in the 2002 voter list.*** Sk Faridul, 48; his brothers Sk Alif, 41, Sk Sariful, 34; and Faridul’s son and wife Sk Alam, 24, Almara Begum, 40. (Express photo by Partha Paul)Sk Faridul, 48; his brothers Sk Alif, 41, and Sk Sariful, 34; and Faridul’s son and wife Sk Alam, 24, Almara Begum, 40; Uluberia Uttar (SC) constituencyLogical discrepancy cited in notice: Unknown.Documents: Faridul says while his father had voted before 2002 too, he could not find his name in the electoral roll of the time, and so he and his brothers mapped their links to their elder brother Sk Gulzar, who was in the 2002 roll.Along with that, Faridul says, he submitted his electricity bill, PAN card, driving licence, and Aadhaar.His son Alam says he gave his school-leaving certificate, Aadhaar, PAN and birth certificate.Almara says both her parents figured in the 2002 SIR, and she submitted that. “Along with that, I submitted my school certificate, family tree papers, PAN and Aadhaar.”Alif claims that while he had the documents showing linkage to Gulzar, the officials “only took my Aadhaar”.Sariful says he mapped his name to Gulzar’s, as well as gave his Aadhaar, PAN etc.What may have happened: The family members say they have no idea. Adds Almara: “The funny thing is that all my siblings and I gave the same linkage to the 2002 SIR. Excluding me, the other six are included in the electoral roll.”***Md Mossior Rahaman, 67; Sonarpur Uttar constituencyLogical discrepancy cited in notice: His own and father’s name mismatch.Documents: Rahaman says his name is in the 2002 roll, and he has a valid passport, details of both which he submitted.What may have happened: A retired professor of physics and former school teacher, Rahaman says: “I was called for a hearing as my name was Md Mossior Rahaman Gayen, the son of Md Eshaque Gayen, in the 2002 voter list, but I had changed my name in the voter list prepared in 2025 to Md Mossior Rahaman, in line with the name in my passport and other documents.”He adds that he went for the hearing with documents such as Aadhaar, his government pension order, passport and Higher Secondary certificate. “The AERO (Assistant Electoral Roll Officer) assured me that my pension order was sufficient to retain my name in the electoral roll… Later I saw my name sent to adjudication, and then deleted.”Rahaman, who has appealed to the tribunals online, as well as submitted documents physically, says: “What can I do now?”*** Sajeda BibiSajeda Bibi, 63; Sonarpur Uttar constituencyLogical discrepancy cited in notice: Name mismatch.Documents: Sajeda submitted the 2002 electoral roll as well as a 2025 voter list with her name on them. She also has a passport using which she travelled to Saudi Arabia for Haj.What may have happened: Her nephew Saiful Jamadar says, “My aunt was called for a hearing as her name was mentioned in the 2002 electoral roll as Sajeda Jamadar, but later corrected as Sajeda Bibi in all her other documents.”In Sajeda’s husband’s pension order too, she is mentioned by the name Sajeda Bibi as nominee, Saiful says. “She also submitted the affidavit showing the name change officially from Sajeda Jamadar to Sajeda Bibi… What more information should we have submitted during the hearing? We have appealed to the tribunals.”