By day, Garstin Bastion Road, better known as GB Road, is a crowded commercial stretch in Old Delhi. The road, which runs between Ajmeri Gate and Lahori Gate, is lined with shops selling automobile parts, hardware and sanitary fittings. Goods are loaded onto cycle-rickshaws and small transport vehicles as traffic squeezes through the congested street. Above these shops, behind narrow entrances and up dimly lit staircases, are the kothas, the brothels that have made GB Road one of the country’s best-known red-light districts.

The neighbourhood has two distinct lives. The commercial activity continues at street level, while the upper floors house hundreds of women who live and work in cramped rooms, often with little privacy or access to basic facilities. As the shops close in the evening, the character of the street changes. Women emerge from the buildings, some standing along the corridors and balconies, waiting for customers.

Known officially as Swami Shradhanand Marg, GB Road has remained a part of Delhi’s commercial and social landscape for decades. Yet the women who live here continue to face stigma, economic insecurity and institutional neglect. For many, even establishing a permanent address or retrieving documents from their places of origin has become a difficult undertaking.

Now, the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls has added another layer of uncertainty to their lives. Women who have lived in Delhi for years, raised families here and participated in elections are finding their names missing from the electoral rolls. Some have been marked as shifted, deleted or absent, while others are struggling to establish their eligibility through documents they do not possess.

The exercise has reportedly affected around 13 crore voters across the country. In Delhi, more than 47 lakh names were excluded from the first draft of the electoral rolls. While students, civil society groups and opposition parties have protested against the exercise, the experiences of women living on GB Road reveal how electoral revision can have particularly serious consequences for communities already facing social and institutional marginalisation.

Around 2,500 women live on GB Road. According to data shared by officials, of the 1,359 voters listed in the area, more than 800 have been marked as either ‘shifted’, ‘deleted’ or ‘absent’ during the SIR exercise.

Although the reverification process has begun, many women continue to struggle with the documentation required to establish their residential status. Some cannot access electricity bills because landlords refuse to provide them with copies. Others have no birth certificates, educational records or family members in their hometowns who could help establish their identities.

For women who were trafficked or brought to Delhi at a young age, returning to their villages to retrieve old documents is often not a realistic option. Many have lost contact with their families or have no one left who can vouch for their identity.

Out of the eight women interviewed for this story, only two were undergoing the reverification process. Even for them, establishing proof of residence remained a major hurdle. Priti, one of the women interviewed, received her form back without any explanation from the Booth Level Officer (BLO).

For Poonam (name changed), 45, the difficulty of establishing her identity is closely tied to the circumstances in which she arrived in Delhi. Trafficked from Uttarakhand when she was 15, she has spent almost her entire adult life on GB Road, where she raised her four children.

Although she possesses an Aadhaar card, she lacks several other essential documents. Her parents have passed away, and she has no one in her village who could help retrieve her school records or establish her connection to the place.

“If my parents were alive, I could have gone back. But now, how will I go back? Despite living in Delhi for years, I still have to prove my existence,” she said.

For another resident, whose name was also missing from the electoral rolls, the problem began with the absence of any communication from the authorities. She said she had received no notice from the Booth Level Officer explaining why her name had been excluded.

Kiran (name changed), 49, has lived in Delhi for more than two decades. Eight months ago, she was rehabilitated and joined Kat-Katha, an organisation working to end forced sex work and empower women and children in red-light districts, particularly on GB Road.

Despite having spent over 20 years in the city, she found her name missing from the electoral rolls following the SIR exercise.

Kiran said she had submitted her electricity bill and several other documents to establish her residence. When her name did not appear on the voter list, she approached the Booth Level Officer seeking an explanation. She received no response.

For women like Kiran, the absence of an explanation is as troubling as the deletion itself. Having lived in Delhi for decades, they are now left trying to understand why the documents they submitted were considered insufficient.

Another woman said her name had been excluded even after she submitted all the required documents during the reverification process.

Priti (name changed), 39, originally from Rajasthan, was brought to Delhi by a relative when she was 24. She has lived in the city for the past 15 years. Despite possessing the necessary documents, her name remains missing from the electoral rolls.

She had submitted a correction form in an attempt to have her name restored. However, the form was returned without any explanation. When she showed the returned form, there was no reason recorded for its rejection. The Booth Level Officer had not informed her why the application had been turned down.

“We pay for food, rent, and everything else like anyone else. Why should we have to prove our existence? I have all the documents, but my name is still not on the electoral list. What else can I do, and how do I prove my existence?” she asked.

The deletion of existing voters from electoral rolls without notice and an opportunity to be heard raises serious questions about the legality of the SIR exercise, said Harshit Anand, a lawyer practising in Delhi.

The question of due process

Referring to Section 22 of the Representation of the People Act, 1950, and Rule 21A of the Registration of Electors Rules, 1960, Anand said electoral authorities cannot summarily remove an existing voter without following due process.

“The combined effect is that the electoral registration officer, commonly known as the ERO, cannot delete the name of an existing voter without giving the elector notice and a reasonable opportunity of being heard. That is the law,” he said.

Citing the Supreme Court’s 1995 three-judge Bench judgment in Lal Babu Hussain, Anand argued that the burden of establishing grounds for deletion rests with the authorities, not the voter.

“What it means is that the burden of removal is on the authority and it is not on the citizen. If you are conducting an inquiry to remove an existing voter, it must be a real inquiry. It cannot be a mere form-filling exercise like filling up an enumeration form,” he explained.

Anand also pointed to similar deletions in other parts of Delhi, citing the example of JJ Bella Estate, where 728 out of 729 electors were marked as permanently shifted.

According to him, residents there had been living in the area for years, submitted their enumeration forms and possessed acknowledgements signed by BLOs. Some had also voted in the 2024 and 2025 elections.

The question of documentation becomes particularly important in the case of GB Road residents. Anand said Section 19 of the Representation of the People Act requires a person to be ordinarily resident in a constituency but does not prescribe a specific set of documents that must be produced to establish residence.

“Now very interestingly, if you look at that section, it simply says ordinarily resident. It does not say what document you have to produce to prove that you are ordinarily resident or what kind of documentation is required,” he said.

He added that the Election Commission’s manual recognises that homeless and shelterless people who may not possess conventional residential documents can still be enrolled through verification by a Booth Level Officer.

Even when people do not possess documents because of homelessness, shelterlessness or other disadvantages, Anand said, a BLO can visit them and verify their residence.

This provision assumes particular significance for women on GB Road, many of whom may not have conventional proof of residence. Anand argued that their absence during a BLO’s daytime visit cannot automatically be treated as evidence that they do not ordinarily reside in the constituency.

Questioning the enumeration process under SIR, he said the exercise introduces an additional screening stage before document verification.

“This SIR is different from previous electoral revision exercises in India. While intensive and summary revisions had been conducted earlier, the current process introduced an enumeration stage before document verification, which effectively functioned as a screening exercise. Such a process is not provided for under the law,” he said.

He also raised concerns about Form 6, which is being used by people whose names are missing from electoral rolls. The form contains a declaration that the applicant has not previously been registered as a voter. This creates difficulties for people whose names have been deleted despite having voted in previous elections.

Referring to the Delhi High Court’s October ruling on the issue, Anand said the Election Commission had assured the court that existing voters submitting Form 6 in these circumstances would not face prosecution for making a false declaration.

Affected residents can also pursue appellate remedies under Section 24 of the Representation of the People Act, including approaching the District Election Officer (DEO) and subsequently the Chief Electoral Officer (CEO).

Citing the Bella Estate case, Anand said residents had collectively gathered their old EPIC cards and other documents establishing their previous voter status. They submitted Form 6 applications along with a representation to the CEO.

In that representation, he said, they sought written explanations for any exclusion from the electoral rolls.

A life built on an uncertain address

For women on GB Road, the question of electoral registration is inseparable from the larger struggle to establish a sense of belonging in the city.

Nirmala Devi (name changed), 49, came to Delhi from Kolkata when she was a young girl. She has spent her entire life on GB Road. Her 24-year-old daughter’s name, however, has been excluded from the electoral rolls.

“Despite having all the documents, my daughter’s name has been excluded from the list. I have been voting for years, but now my daughter cannot vote because of this SIR exercise,” she said.

She added that her family had lived in the area for years and raised their children there. The exclusion of her daughter’s name came as a shock.

Ritu Rohini, who has been associated with Kat-Katha for several years, said the women were already struggling with difficult living conditions and limited access to basic services. The SIR exercise could further complicate their lives.

“Many of these women were brought here when they were very young. Some do not remember the village or town they came from, and they have no contact with their families. Asking them to produce documents or establish a connection with an old electoral roll can become an almost impossible task,” Rohini said.

She said the organisation works with women on GB Road who wish to be rehabilitated and also assists those facing difficulties with their documents.

Many women, she added, were already unable to access government welfare schemes. The SIR exercise could introduce another layer of difficulty into their efforts to secure basic entitlements.

“These women are already on the margins of society, struggling to meet their basic needs and secure their safety. They should not also have to struggle to prove their existence. They already face stigma and social taboos, and people outside GB Road do not treat them with respect. The loss of their right to vote further pushes them to the margins, deepening their exclusion from society,” she said.

The conditions in which many women live on GB Road underline the precarity of their everyday existence. In several establishments, rooms have been divided into smaller spaces to accommodate more women. Some are barely large enough for a bed and a few personal belongings. Ventilation is limited, privacy is scarce, and several women share overcrowded living spaces.

For many, these rooms are simultaneously their homes and workplaces. Circumstances have left them with little control over their accommodation, access to documents, or connections with their families.

The SIR exercise has brought another uncertainty into this already precarious existence. More than 800 electors in the area have been marked as shifted, deleted or absent. While the reverification process offers an opportunity to address some of these exclusions, the women interviewed for this story continue to face difficulties obtaining explanations and establishing their eligibility.

For women who have spent decades in Delhi, raised children here and built their lives on GB Road, the question is deeply personal: what does it mean to belong to a city if the state cannot recognise your presence in its electoral records?