Chief Ministers don't usually sit on the steps outside a government office. They send letters, hold press conferences, or ask someone to look into it.
But on Thursday, October 1, 2026, Karnataka's Chief Minister DK Shivakumar did something different. He led a sit-in at the Chief Electoral Officer's office in Bengaluru, demanding a criminal probe into what he calls a bulk-filing scheme to knock eligible voters off the rolls.
The Allegation in Plain English
What a Form 7 actually is
Let me keep this simple. Form 7 is the form used to object to a voter's name or seek its deletion from the electoral roll. It's a legitimate tool, because people do die, move or get listed twice. The problem begins when someone files hundreds of these forms against genuine voters.
That's what Shivakumar is alleging, during the ongoing Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls. He says a suspicious surge of Form 7 objections came in during the last days of the claims and objections window, particularly between September 22 and 24.
The numbers in his memorandum
Here's the thing. The CM didn't walk in with vague worries. His memorandum lists specific figures for five assembly segments.
| Constituency | Bulk Form 7 objections alleged |
|---|---|
| Mudigere | 6,259 |
| Belagavi North | About 3,000 |
| Bhalki | 2,285 |
| Babaleshwar | 1,373 |
| Narasimharaja (Mysuru) | About 1,200 |
Speaking to reporters, he also claimed that in Babaleshwar around 1,600 forms had been filed and later taken back after election officials questioned them, and that in Vijayapura district the figure crossed 15,000. He further claimed that in more than 70 per cent of the places his team identified, BJP workers had submitted forms in bulk.
Those are his claims, and they're yet to be tested by an independent probe. But they're detailed enough that they can be checked, which is exactly what he's asking for.
A Chief Minister on the Steps
Who went with him
Shivakumar didn't go alone. He met Chief Electoral Officer V Anbukkumar accompanied by six cabinet ministers, including Lakshman Savadi, Madhu Bangarappa, Shivalinge Gowda and Priyank Kharge. After the briefing, the CM and his colleagues sat outside the CEO's office demanding action.
And that's where it gets interesting politically. A sitting CM staging a dharna against an election authority is a strong visual. It tells you he wants the story to travel, and he wants a record that he asked for action in person.
What he's asking for
The demands are specific. He wants an FIR and a time-bound criminal investigation, with a booth-by-booth and constituency-by-constituency breakdown. He also wants independent verification of whether the people who filed these forms were BJP or JD(S) workers.
| Demand | Why It Matters |
|---|---|
| Register an FIR | Starts a formal criminal process |
| Time-bound criminal probe | Prevents it from dragging on |
| Booth-wise, constituency-wise inquiry | Shows who filed what and where |
| Trace the source of voter data | Pre-printed forms need access to electoral details |
| Verify applicants' political links | Tests the "organised effort" claim |
The Pre-Printed Forms Puzzle
Where did the data come from
Let me be honest, this is the detail that stuck with me most. Shivakumar alleges that Form 7 applications were distributed with voter names and EPIC numbers already printed on them, and he's asked authorities to trace where that data came from.
Think about it. If the details were typed into forms before anyone filed them, somebody had access to the electoral roll data and used it to produce stacks of objections. Whether that's true is something investigators can verify. But it's the kind of detail that turns a complaint into an investigation.
What the paperwork reportedly says
His letter says some Booth Level Officers had returned bulk applications, which suggests the system flagged some of them. It also says FIRs had been lodged over certain incidents, and that copies and available video footage were enclosed. That matches the "3 FIRs" in the headline you may have seen.
He also pointed to video recordings and public statements in which local BJP functionaries allegedly admitted mobilising associates to file bulk deletion forms. I haven't seen the footage myself, so I can't tell you what it shows. And I haven't found a BJP response to these specific allegations, which matters, because every serious claim deserves to hear the other side.
We've Seen This Movie Before
The Aland case
And yeah, this isn't the first time Karnataka has heard about forged Form 7s. Ahead of the 2023 Assembly election, Congress raised alarms about voter deletions in Aland constituency. Aprobe there revealed 5,994 forged applications, and the state government ordered a CID investigation.
| Case | Alleged Scale | What Happened |
|---|---|---|
| Aland, ahead of 2023 polls | 5,994 forged applications | CID probe ordered; Kharge says data access stalled |
| Karnataka SIR, September 2026 | Thousands across several constituencies | CM demands FIR and criminal probe |
Congress president Mallikarjun Kharge later accused the Election Commission of stonewalling crucial data needed to catch those responsible, claiming the case had gone cold. The ECI's side of that argument isn't in what I read, so take it as Kharge's allegation, not a settled fact.
Why the history matters
Because here's what Shivakumar is really betting on. If the Aland case is a precedent, then bulk Form 7 filings aren't a bizarre hypothetical. They've been alleged before, investigated before and, according to critics, never fully resolved.