Supreme Court Criticizes Election Commission's AI Voter Verification Software
The Supreme Court of India on Monday delivered a sharp critique of the Election Commission of India's artificial intelligence-driven software designed to identify logical discrepancies in voter lists. The bench, led by Chief Justice of India Surya Kant and including Justices Joymalya Bagchi and NV Anjaria, repeatedly questioned the methodology, stating it was not aligned with "ground realities".
Massive Scale of AI Flagging in Bengal
According to court proceedings, the AI-powered software earmarked a staggering 1.4 crore voters out of approximately 6.5 crore in West Bengal as having logical discrepancies. These individuals were identified through links with the 2002 State Identification Register rolls and were subsequently asked to attend verification hearings.
Senior advocate Shyam Divan, representing Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee, provided detailed statistics to the court. He revealed that the draft electoral list published in December 2025 contained 7 crore electors, with 6.7 crore successfully mapped against existing records. Among these mapped voters, approximately 1.4 crore appeared on the logical discrepancy list, with Divan noting that "50% of the 70 lakh are on the list due to minor mistakes."
Questionable Parameters and Cultural Insensitivity
Justice Joymalya Bagchi offered specific examples where the software's parameters appeared culturally insensitive and disconnected from practical realities. He highlighted the issuance of notices to individuals with 5 to 6 children, questioning whether this alone constituted a discrepancy requiring official intervention.
More significantly, Justice Bagchi pointed to the software's handling of Bengali naming conventions. "'Kumar' is a middle name in Bengali households," he explained, citing examples where voters named "Tapan Kumar Roy" received notices when listed as "Tapan Roy." Similarly, he noted that "Suvendu Narayan Roy" faced scrutiny for omitting "Narayan," which serves as a traditional middle name rather than an indicator of fraudulent registration.
Flawed Age Gap Calculations
The court also challenged the software's assumptions regarding age relationships between family members. Justice Bagchi criticized the parameters that flagged "implausible age gaps" without considering actual social practices.
The software identified discrepancies where:
- The age difference between parent and child was less than 15 years
- The age difference between voter and grandparent was less than 40 years
- The age difference between parent and child exceeded 50 years
"The ground reality is that with the application of software, the notices are being sent on a wider basis," Justice Bagchi remarked. He emphasized that the software's assumption of no underage marriage contradicted actual social conditions, and that age gap calculations failed to account for variations in marriage ages and family planning practices.
Broader Implications for Electoral Integrity
This judicial scrutiny comes at a critical juncture for electoral processes in West Bengal and potentially sets a precedent for technology implementation in voter verification nationwide. The court's insistence on ground reality alignment suggests that technological solutions must be carefully calibrated to avoid disenfranchising legitimate voters through overly restrictive algorithms.
The Election Commission now faces the challenge of reconciling technological efficiency with cultural sensitivity and practical social understanding as it works to maintain accurate voter rolls while ensuring fundamental voting rights are protected.
