Murshidabad: When the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls began in West Bengal, one fear repeatedly surfaced among people living in the state’s border districts: if a person’s name disappeared from the voter list, would that person eventually be treated as a foreigner and sent to Bangladesh?
For many, the presence of their names in the final electoral roll after SIR was therefore seen as a reassurance.
But what happens when even a person whose name survives the SIR process is later picked up on the allegation that he is a Bangladeshi national?
That is the question now surrounding a family of four in Murshidabad’s Suti area.
Sixty-year-old Dablu Saikh and his three sons — Kayem Saikh, 29, Rajaul Saikh, 20, and Asmaul Saikh, 16 — were allegedly detained by West Bengal Police after being identified as “Bangladeshis”, according to their family and the human rights organisation Banglar Manabadhikar Suraksha Mancha (MASUM).
The family has questioned how their nationality was determined and why people whose names, according to them, continue to appear in Indian electoral records were allegedly treated as foreign nationals.
The case comes days after Jalil Akhtar, a resident of Uttar Dinajpur, walked out on bail after spending 87 days in detention and jail following his detention on suspicion of being a Bangladeshi national. His name was present in electoral records, including the 2026 SIR roll, and police verification of several of his documents was subsequently reported to have found them valid.
Now, in Murshidabad, a family is asking a similar question: If a person can remain on the voter list after SIR and even exercise his right to vote, on what basis can he subsequently be declared a foreigner?
A Knock at 10 pm, Then Four Members of a Family Disappear
According to the family, around five to six police personnel in plain clothes arrived at Dablu Saikh’s home in Baliaghati village under Kashimnagar Panchayat on the night of August 13.
Dablu, the family says, was taken away from the house.
When his family members later went to a nearby police camp to find out where he had been taken, they allegedly discovered that his three sons had also been detained.
The family was reportedly told that Dablu and his sons were “Bangladeshis” and not Indian citizens.
What they say they were not told was the crucial part: on what evidence had that conclusion been reached?
Dablu’s wife, Jahanara Bibi, told eNewsroom that she has not received adequate information about the whereabouts of her husband and sons since they were taken away. She rejected the allegation that they were Bangladeshi nationals.
“My husband and sons were taken away on August 13. First, they took my husband from our home and later arrested my three sons. They were forcibly deported without any investigation. But on what basis were they declared foreigners or Bangladeshis?” she said.
The account of the detention and alleged pushback has also been reported by other media outlets citing MASUM and the family.
Their Names Survived SIR. They Say They Voted Too.
For the family, one of the biggest questions concerns the electoral records of Dablu and his son Kayem.
According to the family, Dablu’s name was not deleted during the SIR process and he exercised his franchise in the 2026 West Bengal Assembly elections.
Kayem, too, reportedly voted this year.
Dablu is also said to possess an Aadhaar card, ration card and other documents relating to his identity and residence in India.
The family points further back — to Dablu’s father, Sk. Samjani, whose name, they say, appeared in electoral records dating back to 1966.
MASUM’s subsequent fact-finding exercise also raised questions about the claim that Dablu and his sons were foreign nationals. The organisation said Dablu’s name had survived the SIR process and that both Dablu and Kayem were reported to have voted in the 2026 election. It also said that Dablu’s father appeared in electoral records dating back to 1966.
A member of the family told eNewsroom:
“My father’s name was not deleted during the SIR process, and he voted this year. My brother Kayem also exercised his franchise. Despite this, the police later identified them as Bangladeshis.”
The family says these records should have triggered a transparent verification process rather than an immediate conclusion about their nationality.
‘People Are Being Identified on Suspicion’
The incident has also caused concern among some residents in the area.
Sofikul Seikh, a former gram panchayat member and resident of the locality, alleged that people were increasingly being identified as “Bangladeshis” on the basis of suspicion without adequate verification.
“The police have become hyperactive in their search for Bangladeshis. There are allegations that even Indian citizens are being pushed back on the basis of suspicion, without proper investigation or due process,” Sofikul told eNewsroom.
He claimed that families in such cases are often left without clear information about the whereabouts of their relatives, adding to their fear and uncertainty.
The question, therefore, is not simply about one family.
It is about what happens when the burden of proving one’s nationality appears to follow a person even after their name has survived the electoral revision process.
MASUM Seeks Independent Investigation
Banglar Manabadhikar Suraksha Manch (MASUM) has now written to the Home Department of the West Bengal government seeking an independent and time-bound investigation into the alleged detention and subsequent pushback of the four family members from Suti.
On September 15, a fact-finding team comprising an academic, journalist, social activist and human rights activist visited the Suti-I and Suti-II block areas of Murshidabad.
The team spoke to villagers, panchayat members, elected representatives, including an MLA, police officials and others to establish what happened to the family.
According to MASUM, the fact-finding exercise raised questions about the claim that Dablu and his sons were foreign nationals.
The organisation said it subsequently raised the matter with Avijit Basu Mallick, Inspector-in-Charge of Suti police station.
It informed that when the team asked the officer on what basis Dablu had been identified as a Bangladeshi national, the officer said he was “confirmed” to be Bangladeshi.
The officer, according to the organisation, also said that Dablu and two of his sons had been handed over to the Border Security Force (BSF) and subsequently pushed back to Bangladesh pursuant to an order of the Foreigners Regional Registration Office (FRRO).
These claims about the police’s account and the alleged pushback are those of MASUM and the family; an independent official record establishing the full circumstances has not been made available in the material reviewed for this report.
But What About the 16-Year-Old?
The detention and alleged removal of Asmaul Saikh, who is stated to be around 16 years old, has raised an additional and particularly serious concern for the rights organisation.
MASUM has questioned why the nationality of each family member was not independently established rather than being inferred from their relationship with their father.
The secretary Kirity Roy asked why other members of Dablu’s family, including his other sons and daughters who continue to live in India, were allegedly not treated as foreign nationals.
The organisation has also raised questions about the safeguards applicable to a minor.
MASUM said Asmaul’s age, identity, family circumstances and legal status should have been considered separately and that appropriate safeguards should apply to any action involving a child.
It has also referred to the child’s rights under the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child, including protection, development, survival and the best interests of the child.
The Question That Remains
MASUM has sought disclosure of records relating to the alleged transfer of Dablu and his sons to the BSF and their subsequent removal across the international border.
The organisation has also asked for an independent investigation into how their nationality was determined and which authority carried out the verification.
For MASUM, the central issue is not whether the government has legal powers to act against foreign nationals.
The question is whether those powers were lawfully exercised in this case — and whether the nationality of the four people was properly and independently established before they were allegedly detained and pushed across the border.
“We demanded immediate steps to ensure the safe return of Dablu and his three sons if they had been taken across the border without a lawful and independently verifiable determination of foreign nationality,” Kirity Roy told eNewsroom.
The case now leaves behind a question that is difficult to ignore:
If surviving the SIR process and exercising the right to vote do not settle the question of a person’s identity, then what does?
