SIR of Electoral Rolls: Accuracy or Alienation?

In Bihar today, a bureaucratic exercise has become a political battleground. The Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls, launched on June 24, 2025, is intended to cleanse the voter list of deceased, migrated, or duplicate entries while enrolling all eligible citizens. On paper, it is a welcome step toward electoral integrity. On the ground, it is stirring both praise and protest.

Assurances Amid Controversy

This week, the Election Commission of India (ECI) assured the Supreme Court that no eligible voter will be removed without notice, a hearing, and a reasoned order. This pledge comes in response to mounting criticism after the draft rolls showed over 65 lakh names marked for deletion. The ECI maintains that each deletion will be backed by documentary proof and subject to an appeal process.

Still, questions remain. An analysis of the draft list revealed nearly 2.9 lakh entries with incomplete addresses such as “House No. 0”. Such anomalies undermine the credibility of the data and cast doubt on the system’s readiness for a revision of this scale.

Political Overtones

The SIR has quickly escalated into a partisan flashpoint. Mamata Banerjee has condemned it as a covert “NRC plot” and vowed to block similar exercises in West Bengal. Abhishek Banerjee has pledged support to any political force opposing the process. The Opposition has disrupted parliamentary proceedings, accusing the government of engineering voter suppression.

In contrast, the NDA and its allies in Bihar defend the exercise as essential to purging inflated rolls. They argue that without such revision, elections risk being tainted by ghost voters and multiple entries.

Beyond Bihar: A National Blueprint

The SIR’s impact will not stop at Bihar’s borders. Assam has already directed district officials to prepare for its own revision, and Rajasthan is grading voters based on documentation requirements. This signals that the ECI may be laying the groundwork for a nationwide roll clean-up before the next general election.

While nationwide accuracy is a laudable aim, critics warn that mass verification drives risk disproportionately affecting marginalized communities, particularly migrants, rural residents, and the poor — groups already vulnerable to bureaucratic exclusion.

The Stakes for Democracy

Accurate electoral rolls are the foundation of fair elections. The presence of deceased or duplicate voters can distort democratic outcomes; the absence of legitimate voters can delegitimize them entirely. The law grants the ECI powers under Article 324 of the Constitution and Section 21 of the Representation of People Act to revise rolls even outside the usual annual cycle — but with that power comes responsibility.

Courts have repeatedly emphasized the “presumption of inclusion”: once a name appears on the roll, it should not be removed lightly. Every deletion must be justified, transparent, and open to challenge.

What Must Be Done

If the SIR is to succeed without eroding public trust, the ECI must ensure:

• Transparency: Publish draft lists promptly and explain deletions in accessible formats.

• Inclusivity: Provide adequate time and multilingual outreach so voters can submit documentation.

• Oversight: Maintain robust grievance redressal and allow independent audits. •

• Neutrality: Resist political influence to preserve institutional credibility.

Similarly, political actors must refrain from exploiting the exercise for partisan gain. The focus should be on strengthening democracy, not deepening divisions.

The Editorial View

The SIR has the potential to be a milestone in electoral reform — or a cautionary tale of how well-intentioned measures can alienate citizens if poorly executed. Its outcome will hinge on process: whether safeguards are respected, transparency is upheld, and genuine voters are not swept away in the zeal to purge the rolls.

Democracy rests on the simple but sacred act of voting. Every legitimate citizen must have that right protected. In the end, the measure of the SIR will not be how many names it removes, but how many voters it keeps — and how much trust it preserves.