TOPIC: SPECIAL INTENSIVE REVISION (SIR)

What is the Bihar SIR

The Election Commission of India (ECI) launched a Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of Bihar’s electoral rolls in mid-2025: a house-to-house, state-wide enumeration aimed at rebuilding the rolls (enumeration forms collected from all electors) and cleaning duplicates, deceased and migrated entries.

The ECI characterised the exercise as necessary because the rolls had not undergone a comparable intensive revision in many years and to address urban migration and demographic changes. The ECI reported very large participation in the enumeration phase (over 7.2 crore responses) while also flagging a large number of entries for possible deletion in the draft roll.

Legal & Constitutional Basis

1. Article 324, Constitution – Plenary powers of ECI for superintendence, direction and control of elections.

2. RPA 1950 (Sections 15–23) – Provides for preparation, revision, correction and deletion of names in rolls.

3. Registration of Electors Rules, 1960 – Procedural framework for inclusion, objections, verification.

4. Supreme Court Jurisprudence

• • • Mohinder Singh Gill v. CEC (1978) – EC’s plenary powers extend to ensuring free and fair elections.
    • PUCL v. Union of India (2003) – Transparency in electoral process, including access to roll data.
    • ADR v. ECI (2025) – SC directed publication of deletion lists and acceptance of Aadhaar as proof during Bihar SIR.

Evolution of Roll Revisions in India

• • 1950s–70s: Full house-to-house enumerations.
  • 1990s: Last major intensive revisions; introduction of EPIC.
  • 2000s onwards: Annual Summary Revision + Continuous updation model.
  • 2025 (Bihar SIR): Full-scale enumeration revived after decades due to concerns of inflated rolls, migration, and litigation.

Evolution of SIR in India

Period	Trigger / Context	Features
1950s (post-Constitution)	First nationwide electoral rolls under RPA 1950 & 1951	House-to-house enumeration by enumerators; paper rolls
1960s–70s	Frequent by-elections, delimitation	First “special revisions” ordered; manual correction of errors
1980s	Growth of urban migration, rising complaints of bogus voters	Introduction of photographic rolls in some states; larger “Intensive” revisions
1990s	Computerisation begins; T.N. Seshan’s reforms	Door-to-door verification + computerised rolls; stronger field verification before elections
2000s	EPIC (Elector Photo ID Card) coverage expands	SIR used to integrate EPIC data with rolls; cross-checking duplicate entries
2010s	Roll-out of SVEEP (Systematic Voters’ Education and Electoral Participation)	SIR combined with outreach, online forms (Form 6, 7, 8); gender and youth inclusion
2020s	Continuous updation, digital portals, linking with Aadhaar under DPDP compliance	SIR becomes hybrid: door-to-door verification + online authentication; GIS & AI-enabled mapping for error detection

Normal process of roll revision

• • Annual Summary Revision (SRR):
    • Conducted every year with January 1 as the qualifying date.
    • Draft roll published → period for claims & objections (Form 6/7/8 under Registration of Electors Rules, 1960).
    • BLOs verify applications, final roll published.
    • This is routine, usually done in advance of elections.
  • Continuous updation:
    • Provision under Section 22 & 23 of RPA 1950 allows additions, deletions, corrections even after final roll, till the last date of nominations.
  • Intensive Revision (historical):
    • In earlier decades, especially after independence, house-to-house enumeration was conducted every few years.
    • Post-1990s, with improved EPIC (Electors Photo Identity Card) coverage and digitisation, ECI shifted to summary revisions supplemented by BLO verification.

Features of Bihar SIR 2025

• • House-to-house verification: Every household required to fill voter details form.
  • Scale: Over 7.2 crore forms collected; about 65 lakh names flagged as “SAD voters” (Shifted, Absent, Dead).
  • Transparency measures: For the first time, lists of deleted voters published with reasons.
  • Aadhaar as proof: Initially excluded, but later allowed by Supreme Court order.
  • Judicial supervision: SC continuously monitored the exercise to safeguard against wrongful deletions.

How the 2025 SIR in Bihar is different

Nature of Exercise

• • SIR = Special Intensive Revision → full house-to-house enumeration, akin to census mode.
  • Unlike Summary Revision, SIR required every household to fill an enumeration form, not just new applicants.

Reasons for Adoption

• • Large-scale migration, urbanisation and suspected inflated rolls in Bihar.
  • Long gap since last full intensive revision.
  • Political demand and litigation (ADR petition) questioning accuracy of Bihar rolls.

Procedural Differences

Feature	Normal Summary Revision	SIR (Bihar 2025)
Scope	Additions, deletions, corrections only on request	Compulsory enumeration of all electors
Method	BLO verification, claims & objections	Door-to-door household visit + fresh forms
Participation	Voter-initiated (file Form 6/7/8)	Enumerator-initiated (voter must respond)
Transparency	Draft rolls published, objections invited	Draft + publication of deleted names with reasons (ordered by SC)
Identity Proofs	Multiple docs, Aadhaar voluntary	Initially 11 docs, later Aadhaar added by SC order
Scale	Incremental changes	Over 7.2 crore forms collected, ~65 lakh deletions flagged
Oversight	CEO + ERO	SC actively monitoring, directing voter-friendly steps

Field machinery and stakeholders: SIR was implemented through the ECI’s usual machinery: Chief Electoral Officer (state level), District Election Officers, Booth Level Officers (BLOs) and a large number of Booth Level Agents (BLAs) nominated by recognised political parties. The ECI also used digital enumeration forms and online interfaces to record responses and to publish draft rolls.

No.	Documents
1	Birth Certificate
2	Passport
3	Matriculation or higher-education certificate (school/college certificate)
4	Identity card / pension order issued to a government/regular employee or pensioner
5	Permanent residence certificate
6	Forest Rights certificate
7	Caste certificate (SC/ST/OBC)
8	National Register of Citizens (NRC) document, if applicable
9	Family Register issued by local authorities
10	Land or house allotment certificate by governmental authorities
11	Government/PSU issued identity documents that are dated before July 1, 1987
12	Aadhaar card (recently added as 12th, but only for identity, not citizenship)

Principal petition and hearings: A batch of public interest and political petitions — notably Association for Democratic Reforms (ADR) v. Election Commission of India — challenged the SIR before the Supreme Court (arguing arbitrariness, constitutional defects, and potential disenfranchisement). The petitions sought directions on process, timelines, documents and transparency.

Important interim judicial directions: Following hearings, the Supreme Court issued significant interim directions that re-calibrated the SIR exercise:

1. Publication of deleted names & reasons: The Court ordered the ECI to publish, at booth/district level and online (searchable lists), the names of voters who were omitted from the draft roll and the reason for deletion — thereby introducing transparency and enabling targeted claims/objections.

2. Acceptance of Aadhaar as identity proof: The Court directed the ECI to consider Aadhaar as an acceptable document (effectively as a 11th document) for purposes of identity/residence in the SIR — while clarifying that Aadhaar is not a proof of citizenship. This was a crucial accessibility measure given Aadhaar’s wide penetration relative to some other documents. (Recent SC direction / hearing)

3. Facilitation for claims & objections: The Court directed steps to make claims/objections citizen-friendly (online filing, display at local offices, publicity) and asked political parties to instruct their BLAs to assist vulnerable electors. The Court emphasised that the revision must be “voter-friendly” and not result in arbitrary exclusion.

SAD = Shifted, Absent, Dead voters

• • In the Election Commission’s roll management terminology, “SAD” refers to entries in the roll that are no longer valid:
    • S – Shifted: voter has migrated to another constituency/booth.
    • A – Absent: voter not found at the registered address.
    • D – Dead: voter has passed away.
  • These categories come up prominently during Special Summary Revisions (SSR) or Special Intensive Revisions (SIR) like the one in Bihar (2025).
  • Such voters are marked for deletion after due verification, to maintain roll purity.

Political and normative controversies

• • Exclusion vs. cleansing: Proponents (ECI) framed SIR as necessary to prevent bogus voting and to update rolls; critics warned of mass disenfranchisement, especially for migrants, the poor, and marginalised groups who may lack the specified documents or the capacity to respond within timelines. The large numbers flagged for deletion intensified these concerns.
  • Partisanship and trust deficit: Opposition parties alleged the exercise could be politically engineered (timing before polls; specific data choices); the ECI denied politicisation. The Supreme Court explicitly noted trust/participation problems and directed greater transparency and facilitation.
  • Operational issues: Reports flagged administrative glitches (duplicate EPICs, non-acceptance of certain documents at BL0s, uneven outreach), and the Court’s orders to publish deletions and accept Aadhaar sought to remedy such problems.

Analytical assessment

1. ECI’s authority is broad but not unchecked. Article 324 and RPA rules provide ECI space for corrective exercises, but judicial oversight ensures that such exercises respect due process and do not imperil the franchise. The SC orders illustrate balancing institutional autonomy with protection of voters’ rights.

2. Procedural transparency matters. Publishing deleted names/reasons and enabling easy claims lowers the risk of inadvertent disenfranchisement and builds legitimacy. Transparency converts administrative correctness into socially acceptable legitimacy. The SC’s emphasis on searchable lists was therefore legally and administratively significant.

3. Document rules must be inclusive. Evidence-based policymaking requires that identity/residence requirements be proportionate. The Court’s direction to accept Aadhaar recognised Aadhaar’s functional role in Indian identity ecosystems while reiterating constitutional limits on citizenship proof.

4. Political trust is a prerequisite for electoral housekeeping. Large scale roll corrections in a polarized political environment inevitably attract suspicions. Proactive engagement of parties, civil society and clear timelines can reduce the perception of partisanship. The Court’s instruction to involve BLAs and parties was aimed at this practical reality.

POLICY TAKEAWAYS

• • Adopt a phased, multi-channel facilitation plan (online + local counters + mobile camps) before any mass deletion is finalised.
  • Standardise a minimum set of widely-held identity proofs (including Aadhaar where privacy safeguards are met) to minimise exclusion.
  • Publish booth-level lists with reasons and ensure easy single-click claim/objection mechanisms; proactively send SMS/alerts to affected electors.
  • Independent audit and third-party verification (civil society, academic observers) to enhance credibility of roll-cleaning exercises.
  • Strengthen migrant voter mechanisms (e.g., streamlined transposition/temporary registration) so internal migration does not translate into disenfranchisement.

CONCLUSION

The Special Intensive Revision in Bihar (2025) represents a turning point in India’s electoral history. It demonstrates the tension between ensuring clean rolls (integrity) and safeguarding inclusive democracy (access). While politically contested, it highlights the evolving role of the ECI, judiciary, and technology in protecting the world’s largest democratic exercise.

In the long run, balancing accuracy, inclusivity, and trust will determine whether such exercises strengthen or weaken faith in Indian democracy.

Value / Ethical Principle	How SIR Upheld It (Defensible)	How SIR Questioned It (Problematic)	Thinkers / Quotes
Integrity	Attempted to clean duplicate/fake voters; strengthened electoral rolls.	Mass deletions risked undermining integrity by excluding genuine voters.	Lincoln: “The ballot is stronger than the bullet.”
Fairness / Justice	Applied rules under RPA 1950 uniformly.	Procedural fairness overshadowed substantive justice; poor & migrants disadvantaged.	Rawls: justice must benefit the least-advantaged.
Transparency	SC mandated publication of booth-wise deletion lists.	Opaque process initially; many voters unaware until deletion.	Amartya Sen: democracy needs “informed participation.”
Empathy / Compassion	Legal compliance ensured formal equality.	Lack of empathy for vulnerable groups (elderly, women, displaced).	Gandhi: “Recall the face of the poorest…”
Accountability	EROs followed statutory powers; deletions reviewable.	Lack of speaking orders initially → weak accountability.	Weber: ethic of responsibility for consequences.
Rule of Law vs. Equity	Operated strictly under law.	Aristotle: equity must correct law’s rigidity; here equity ignored.	Aristotle: justice ≠ strict legality.

Spread the Word