Navdeep Suri, former diplomat, flags 'trouble establishing citizenship' during Punjab SIR

Former diplomat Navdeep Suri on Sunday said he was facing difficulties in establishing his citizenship during the ongoing Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls in Punjab, despite having served as India's ambassador in three countries.

Suri has served as India's high commissioner to Australia and ambassador to UAE and Egypt.

In a post on X, Suri said that he was asked to provide "unspecified documents" to establish that he was an Indian citizen.


"Sharing my experience with #SIR in Punjab. Went to BLO, submitted Voter ID and Aadhaar card, was assured that everything is in order. Got a message today from a volunteer saying some details don’t match with SIR in 2003!" Suri said.


"Spoke with BLO, was told that I should come and collect the notice. And then come again with unspecified documents that show I am an Indian citizen. Replied that I was not in India in 2003, so they’ve asked for passport as proof," he added.

"I happen to have documents other than voter ID and Aadhaar card. But can’t help asking: If I have trouble establishing my citizenship after representing India in three countries, what’s the fate of the common citizen? Ease of Living, I presume!" he said.

The Special Intensive Revision (SIR) was first launched in Bihar in June 2025. Following the exercise, more than 60 lakh names, including those of deceased voters, were removed from the electoral rolls. In West Bengal, around 90 lakh voters were deleted from the rolls ahead of the Assembly elections.

Under the SIR process, voters whose names were not included in the 2002 or 2003 electoral rolls are required to submit documents establishing their link to individuals listed in those legacy rolls. The Election Commission of India (ECI) had initially identified 11 documents as acceptable, with Aadhaar excluded from the list.

Following proceedings in the Supreme Court, the poll panel expanded the list to include Aadhaar as an acceptable document.

The Supreme Court has also commented on the broader constitutional implications of the exercise, noting that while the ECI has the authority to revise electoral rolls, its powers cannot be "untrammelled" and must be exercised in accordance with principles of transparency and natural justice.