THE CONTEXT: The Election Commission of India (ECI) ordered a Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of Bihar’s electoral rolls on 24 June 2025, fixing 1 July 2025 as the qualifying date and requiring re-verification of roughly 4.74 crore electors—nearly 60 percent of the State’s electorate. The move comes barely four months before Assembly polls, prompting protests, Supreme Court petitions, and a nationwide strike led by trade unions and Opposition parties.
THE BACKGROUND:
-
- Article 326 guarantees elections based on universal adult franchise subject to “reasonable restrictions”.
- Article 324 vests “superintendence, direction and control” of elections in the ECI. The Supreme Court in Mohinder Singh Gill v. Chief Election Commissioner (1978) described Article 324 as a “reservoir of power” but clarified that statutory provisions prevail where they exist.
- Representation of the People Act, 1950 (RPA 1950)
-
-
- Section 21(1)(2): Annual revision with 1 January as qualifying date.
- Section 21(3): Allows a special revision “for a constituency or part thereof” at any time, recording reasons.
-
-
- Registration of Electors Rules, 1960, Rule 8: Citizens to furnish information “to the best of their ability”; the burden of proof is not absolute.
WHAT EXACTLY IS BEING DONE?
-
- Under the 24 June 2025 order, every elector receives a pre-filled, 13-page “Enumeration Form 1” (EF-1).
- All voters first added after the 2003 roll must return this form with documentary proof of Indian citizenship and ordinary residence.
- Booth-Level Officers (BLOs) conduct the household visits, distribute the forms, and guide voters in filling them.
WHY HAS THE ECI INTRODUCED THIS EXERCISE?
According to the Commission, the last intensive revision in Bihar was carried out in 2003. Over two decades, rapid urbanisation, large-scale migration, under-reporting of deaths, and allegations of illegal entrants have “diluted” roll accuracy. The stated objectives are therefore fourfold:
1. Include all newly eligible citizens (18 years +),
2. Delete names of deceased, shifted, or duplicate electors,
3. Identify and remove any ineligible non-citizens, and
4. Pilot a document-backed, paper-to-digital workflow (ECINET) that could be replicated nationally.
HOW IS THE REVISION BEING CARRIED OUT ON THE GROUND?
| STEP | OPERATIONAL DETAIL |
|---|---|
| Document requirements | The ECI has listed 11 acceptable documents; birth certificate, passport, matriculation certificate, pre-1987 government IDs, land-allotment papers, etc. Aadhaar, Photo Voter ID or MGNREGA job cards are not accepted as standalone proof. Each document must be self-attested separately for the voter and (if cited) parents. |
| Form submission modes | Completed EF-1 can be (a) handed to the BLO, (b) deposited at designated collection centres, or (c) scanned and uploaded on ECINET (Election Commission Integrated Network)—a secure, cloud-based portal accessible only to authorised officials. |
| Data upload & monitoring | Within two weeks, 18 percent of forms had already been uploaded; daily progress is visible to the Commission via real-time ECINET dashboards. |
| Draft roll & redressal | A draft roll will be published on 1 August 2025. From then until 1 September, citizens may file claims and objections. Electoral Registration Officers (EROs) must pass a written, appealable order before any deletion. Appeals lie to the District Magistrate and then the Chief Electoral Officer under Section 24, Representation of the People Act, 1950. |
SIGNIFICANCE FOR INDIAN DEMOCRACY:
-
- Tests the balance between maintaining purity of rolls (free-and-fair elections—basic-structure doctrine) and safeguarding inclusiveness (universal franchise).
- Could set a precedent for document-intensive revisions nationwide, altering the ease of voter registration and potentially shaping electoral demography.
DRIVERS BEHIND THE 2025 EXERCISE:
1. Technological ambitions: ECINET rollout seeks granular, blockchain-based voter authentication.
2. Political contestation: Tight electoral margins in Bihar; allegations of demographic engineering.
3. Security narrative: Rising discourse around “illegal migration” from neighbouring countries, mirrored in ongoing National Register of Citizens debate.
INDIAN EXPERIENCE: PRECEDENTS AND COMPARATORS
| PRECEDENT | KEY TAKE-AWAY |
|---|---|
| Assam intensive revision (2005) | Supreme Court held prior inclusion creates presumption of citizenship; deletion requires notice and hearing. |
| National Register of Citizens (2019, Assam) | Massive documentation led to 19 lakh exclusions; process criticised for data gaps and humanitarian costs. |
| Electoral Roll Purification & Authentication Drive (2015) | Linked Voter ID with Aadhaar; stopped after Supreme Court’s privacy concerns; shows limits of techno-centric approach. |
GLOBAL PERSPECTIVE AND BENCH-MARK PRACTICES:
-
- UK: Annual canvass uses household enquiry but allows self-attestation; documentary proof demanded only in suspicious cases.
- Canada: National Register of Electors updated continuously through data-sharing (tax, driving licences) without voter-initiated documentation.
- South Africa: Uses smart-ID linkage but prohibits mass deletions within six months of an election.
THE ISSUES:
-
- Legal infirmity: Qualifying date of 1 July 2025 lacks statutory backing; Section 21(3) permits constituency-specific not State-wide special revisions.
- Documentation burden: Birth certificates exist for only 81 percent of Bihar births registered after 2005; older cohorts lack records.
- Temporal constraints: Monsoon flooding affects 14 of 38 districts, hindering field verification.
- Digital divide: ECINET upload requires stable internet; 44 percent of Bihar’s gram panchayats have patchy connectivity (DoT 2024).
- Marginalised groups at risk: Migrant workers (20 percent of State population), Muslim minorities, Extremely Backward Classes with lower document possession indices.
- Institutional credibility: Rejection of ECI-issued Photo Voter ID undermines trust in earlier validations.
- Overlap with citizenship adjudication: Conflating voter verification with nationality determination encroaches on the mandate of Foreigners’ Tribunals and Courts.
THE WAY FORWARD:
-
- Insert a “State-wide Special Revision” clause in the Representation of the People Act, 1950. Parliament can amend Section 21 to spell out triggers (census delay, >5 % migration, etc.), prescribe consultation with an all-party committee, and lock the qualifying date to 1 January unless both Houses waive it by a special resolution.
- Codify due-process safeguards through a Model Electoral Roll (Deletion) Rules, 2026. The Rules should mandate a written show-cause notice, 30 days to reply, and a speaking order for every deletion, mirroring the Supreme Court’s 2005 directions in the Assam revision case. Embedding these steps in subordinate legislation avoids lengthy constitutional litigation and protects voters’ dignity.
- Use “Sakala-style” service-level guarantees for roll correction. The Karnataka Sakala Act (2011) guarantees time-bound delivery of 1120 citizen services; adding “voter roll correction” with a 15-day limit and automatic compensation for delay will make EROs accountable.
- Deploy an offline-first ECINET mobile app with store-and-forward capability. In 27 flood-prone districts, 3G/4G drops are routine; an app that syncs when the BLO reaches connectivity (tested during Odisha panchayat polls 2022) avoids data gaps. The codebase already exists within the Election Commission’s ERONET platform.
- Accept any two functional IDs plus one local witness as prima-facie proof. Where birth certificates are missing, pairing a Photo Voter ID with an e-Shram or MGNREGA card, countersigned by the elected ward member, mirrors Uttarakhand’s 2019 “parivar register” practice and satisfies Rule 8 (“best of ability”) of the Registration of Electors Rules.
- Create “Migrant Facilitation Desks” at railway stations and factory clusters. Labour Department officers can co-locate with Jan Suvidha Kendras to issue residence attestations on-the-spot, cutting travel costs for 20 % of Bihar’s electorate that migrates seasonally. Andhra Pradesh’s 2023 “Anywhere Enrolment” drive shows a 17 % uptick in migrant registrations within six months.
- Institute District Election Ombudsmen under retired District Judges. They can dispose of appeals within 15 days, and their annual compendium of orders will inform training modules for EROs, creating a feedback loop.
- Require an annual, sample-based Social Audit by the Comptroller and Auditor General’s empanelled CSOs. A 0.2 % random sample of deletions, verified on-ground, will spotlight wrongful exclusions; the audit report must be tabled in both Houses of Parliament for transparency.
- Adopt Uttar Pradesh’s hospital-based instant birth-certificate model statewide. UP raised on-time birth registration from 50 % to 61.8 % in two years by making hospital discharge contingent on digital registration; Bihar’s Health Department can replicate this through an API bridge with the CRS portal.
THE CONCLUSION:
The Bihar SIR controversy spotlights the delicate equilibrium between electoral roll accuracy and voter inclusivity. The Constitution intentionally denies any institution unfettered power; legality, proportionality and reasonableness must guide electoral management. A law-consistent revision protocol, coupled with technology that empowers rather than excludes, can uphold both integrity and universal adult suffrage.
UPSC PAST YEAR QUESTION:
Q. To enhance the quality of democracy in India the Election Commission of India has proposed electoral reforms in 2016. What are the suggested reforms and how far are they significant to make democracy successful? 2016
MAINS PRACTICE QUESTION:
Q. Critically examine the constitutional and statutory limits on the Election Commission of India’s power to revise electoral rolls. In the light of the 2025 Special Intensive Revision in Bihar, discuss the challenges of balancing voter inclusivity with roll purity.
SOURCE:
https://www.thehindu.com/opinion/op-ed/the-eci-does-not-have-unfettered-powers/article69788840.ece
Spread the Word