Hundreds of Muslim residents in Surat's Salabatpura area have filed police complaints against BJP corporator Vikram Popat Patil, alleging systematic misuse of electoral procedures to fraudulently remove their names from voting rolls by falsely declaring them deceased ahead of upcoming municipal elections.
Approximately 118 to 228 living voters reportedly had removal applications filed against them using Form 7—a legitimate electoral tool allowing registered voters to object to names on voting lists—according to The Wire's investigation. Complainants claim the applications bear Patil's name, phone number, and signature matching his official election affidavit from 2021.
The alleged scheme emerged after the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) process published draft electoral rolls in December 2025. Victims discovered fraudulent applications through Block Level Officers during the January 18, 2026 objection deadline, when citizens can contest proposed deletions from voting lists.
Abdul Razzaq Wazir Shah, a 69-year-old resident, reported that Form 7 applications were filed against himself, his son, and his wife—all declaring them deceased despite years of continuous residence and regular voting participation. "We have lived here for decades and voted in every election," Shah stated. "Someone filed papers saying we are dead, using the corporator's information."
In India, as across the subcontinent, scale and diversity make simple narratives impossible—and fascinating. Electoral manipulation allegations occur across party lines and states, but the Gujarat case stands out for its systematic targeting of a specific religious community and the paper trail allegedly connecting deletions to an elected official.
Making false declarations on Form 7 carries penalties of up to one year imprisonment or fines under Section 31 of the Representation of the People Act. The law criminalizes knowingly providing false information in electoral documents, though prosecutions remain rare and convictions rarer still in India's overburdened judicial system.
Corporator Patil disconnected calls with journalists seeking comment, declining to address the allegations. Local police officials similarly refused engagement when contacted about the criminal complaints. The BJP spokesperson provided no response to inquiries from The Wire, maintaining the party's standard practice of avoiding comment on state-level controversies pending investigation.
Congress opposition leader Aslam Cyclewala condemned the actions as "electoral manipulation," demanding that election officials reject all applications lacking supporting evidence such as death certificates. "This is not about one or two names," Cyclewala stated. "This is systematic targeting of Muslim voters in areas where elections are competitive."
The controversy gains additional significance from precedent set by Assam Chief Minister Himanta Biswa Sarma, who publicly acknowledged directing party workers to file Form 7 complaints against Muslim communities "to cause trouble" during that state's electoral revision. Sarma's explicit admission that voter roll challenges served political rather than accuracy purposes provided opposition parties with ammunition to argue the practice represents nationwide BJP strategy rather than isolated incidents.
Gujarat has been governed by the BJP continuously since 1998, making it the party's longest-held major state. Prime Minister Narendra Modi served as Gujarat Chief Minister from 2001 to 2014 before becoming prime minister. The state's political culture reflects this long dominance, with opposition parties struggling to compete effectively even in municipal elections where local issues theoretically matter more than state or national politics.
The municipal elections scheduled for later this year carry particular weight in Surat, where the diamond polishing industry employs hundreds of thousands and the city serves as a commercial hub for Gujarat. Control of municipal corporations determines contracts worth hundreds of crores, making these elections financially significant beyond their formal powers over local services.
Electoral integrity in India faces structural challenges beyond partisan manipulation. Voter rolls frequently contain errors—deceased persons remaining registered, duplicate entries for individuals who moved between constituencies, and missing registrations for eligible citizens who never completed paperwork. The SIR process aims to correct these inaccuracies through public review and objection mechanisms.
The Form 7 procedure serves legitimate purposes when used honestly. Citizens can flag deceased relatives remaining on rolls or identify individuals who moved away but remain registered. The system depends on good faith participation—an assumption that breaks down when political actors file mass objections targeting opponent communities.
Verification burdens fall on challenged voters, who must appear before electoral officials with documents proving their continued residence and voter eligibility. For working-class residents, taking time off employment to contest bureaucratic challenges creates real hardship, which may be precisely the point of filing bulk false objections even if most eventually fail.
The Election Commission of India has not issued public statements on the Surat allegations, maintaining its standard practice of investigating complaints through administrative channels before making determinations. Opposition parties frequently accuse the constitutional body of pro-government bias, though the Commission's actual record shows mixed patterns of intervention across different states and circumstances.
