65 Lakh Deletions Later: SC Orders Disclosure, EC Cornered, Opposition Seizes the Moment

Launched in June 2025 in Bihar and intended for eventual nationwide implementation, the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls was introduced by the Election Commission of India (ECI) as a long-overdue administrative reform.

The official rationale was simple: many electoral rolls had remained unchanged or only minimally revised since 2003, leading to duplication, errors, and outdated entries. Yet the reality of the exercise has turned out to be far more controversial and consequential.

Instead of simply streamlining the voter registry, the process has ignited allegations of targeted disenfranchisement and democratic backsliding. In just a few weeks, more than 65 lakh voters were struck off Bihar’s draft rolls – an extraordinary figure by any measure. Those hit hardest belong to the most vulnerable groups in society: women, religious minorities, internal migrants, and the economically marginalised.

In its current framework, the exercise falters on intent, timing, and method, thereby disenfranchising many who have a legitimate right to be on the voters’ list. The problem is not simply one of administrative oversight but of design, where structural flaws create systematic barriers to inclusion and call into question the fairness of the process itself.

Shifting the goalposts of voter eligibility

The SIR is particularly troubling because it fundamentally redefines the very premise of voter list revisions. Traditionally, both summary and intensive updates focused on routine adjustments, adding new voters who had reached eligibility, removing the deceased, and reflecting changes in residence. Crucially, the system relied on self-declaration rather than the state preemptively questioning the eligibility of large groups of citizens.

SIR, however, represents a marked departure from this approach, shifting the burden of inclusion onto the citizens themselves. What was once a routine administrative exercise to maintain accurate electoral rolls has now morphed into a quasi-legal process of citizenship verification – a shift explicitly underscored by the Chief Election Commissioner (CEC) during his press conference on August 17.

The ECI has consistently defended the SIR as a mechanism to identify non-citizens, often referred to in political discourse as “illegal immigrants,” a term commonly associated with undocumented Bangladeshi migrants. Reports suggest that during the revision process in Bihar, Booth Level Officers (BLOs) flagged certain individuals as potential foreign nationals, even though these individuals held Indian identity documents such as Aadhaar cards, ration cards, and domicile certificates.

However, the ECI has not disclosed precise figures regarding how many foreign nationals were identified. In both court filings and public statements, the Commission has not cited any verified instances of foreign nationals being included on the voter rolls in Bihar. The lack of transparent data has prompted concerns that the exercise may be less about protecting electoral integrity and more about altering the composition of the electorate raising questions about potential demographic engineering that could narrow political pluralism before a single vote is cast.

Disenfranchised by paperwork

Investigations by The Hindu, The Reporters’ Collective, and The Wire have uncovered significant anomalies and inconsistencies in the electoral rolls, highlighting how bureaucratic hurdles disproportionately affect women and migrant workers. Many citizens struggle to meet increasingly stringent documentation requirements.

Despite higher male migration and slightly higher male mortality in recent years, nearly 32 lakh women have been excluded from the voter rolls, compared with 25 lakh men – a discrepancy that raises urgent questions about systemic bias in the registration process. A recent Lokniti-CSDS survey, reported in The Hindu, reinforces these concerns, underscoring the everyday challenges voters face during verification in several states.

In parallel, widespread media reports from Bihar, the epicentre of the ongoing SIR, reflect an even graver situation. Journalistic accounts and local surveys indicate that marginalised communities, migrant labourers, women, and senior citizens are struggling to meet documentation demands, often despite being long-time registered voters. The situation in Bihar suggests that the documentation barrier is not a technical oversight but a systemic fault line, disproportionately affecting those with the least bureaucratic visibility.

Ironically, the one document that is nearly universally held by Indian citizens, the Aadhaar card, has not been accepted by the ECI as valid proof of identity. Although the Supreme Court has recently directed the ECI to permit the use of Aadhaar for re-enrolment in deletion cases, this intervention came after the mass removals had already occurred.

But with a narrow window left before the revised roll is published on September 1, the opportunity for voters to restore their names to the rolls by submitting their Aadhaar card is severely limited. Many affected voters will likely remain disenfranchised, despite the Court directive on accepting Aadhaar. Nonetheless, the Court’s intervention provides a way to complete the filing of claims and objections to address their anomalous situations.

Where are the new voters?

What stands out most in this revision exercise is the striking absence of new voter additions. In any functioning democracy, updating electoral rolls serves a dual purpose: removing ineligible or outdated entries while simultaneously enrolling citizens who have newly reached voting age. Ideally, the process ensures both accuracy and inclusiveness.

Yet, disparities between states reveal significant inconsistencies. In Maharashtra, for example, between the 2024 Lok Sabha elections (April–May) and the 2024 Maharashtra Legislative Assembly elections (November), the number of new electors surged by 40.81 lakh. The reported increase of new electors in Maharashtra between the 2024 Lok Sabha and Assembly elections is corroborated by official ECI data.

Bihar, by contrast, presents a strikingly different scenario. The revision process so far has been overwhelmingly dominated by deletions, with almost no additions reported - a phenomenon virtually unprecedented in the history of Indian elections.

While it remains possible that some new voters may eventually have their names included in the final list, critics warn that such an imbalance effectively predetermines the composition of the electorate. This could tilt the political playing field in favour of certain parties or communities, even before citizens have the opportunity to vote or, in the contemporary context, approach the EVMs.

Judicial scrutiny of electoral roll revision

Amid rising public concern over the revision of Bihar’s electoral roll, the Supreme Court of India intervened, not to halt the process, but to ensure greater transparency in its implementation. The Court directed the ECI to disclose the rationale behind its actions, accept Aadhaar as valid identification, and publish searchable, district-level lists of the 65 lakh voters excluded from the draft roll. Each entry was to specify the reason for removal, whether due to death, migration, or duplication.

The very need for judicial intervention to secure such disclosures highlights procedural lapses that could undermine confidence in the Commission’s impartiality. As hearings continue, the constitutionality of this exercise, conducted despite the ECI’s own summary revision in January, remains to be adjudicated.

Political and legal fallout

The political consequences of the intensive revision of Bihar’s electoral rolls are becoming increasingly apparent. With state assembly elections approaching, Opposition parties have accused the ECI of bias, alleging that it has “failed to uphold its constitutional duty of ensuring a free and fair electoral process.” Critics argue that the revision disproportionately affects voters perceived as unsympathetic to the ruling party.

The Congress has gone further, claiming that “large-scale voter suppression” has occurred in the lead-up to the 2024 general elections.

The INDIA bloc has launched a coordinated campaign to spotlight voter roll discrepancies, not only in Bihar but also in Karnataka’s Mahadevpura constituency and during the Maharashtra Assembly elections. Opposition leaders have linked the ECI’s handling of the revision process to broader concerns about the erosion of institutional neutrality.

In a dramatic escalation, the bloc has announced plans to move an impeachment motion against CEC Gyanesh Kumar. While the motion is unlikely to succeed due to the bloc’s limited parliamentary strength, it underscores the deepening mistrust surrounding the ECI’s handling of the electoral process.

At stake is the credibility of an institution long regarded as a neutral arbiter of India's electoral process. What began as an administrative initiative to update and clean voter lists is increasingly perceived by critics as a politicized intervention, one capable of reshaping Bihar’s electoral landscape by determining who is included or excluded from the rolls.

If similar revisions are undertaken elsewhere, the potential impact could extend far beyond one state, influencing electoral outcomes and public confidence nationwide. For many citizens, the main concern is about exclusion through procedural opacity and administrative lapses.

These developments raise a fundamental question: will India’s electoral system continue to abide by the principle of universal adult suffrage, or will incremental restrictions erode the constitutional guarantee of the right to vote? In this context, continued judicial oversight and informed public scrutiny will be central to maintaining confidence in the electoral process.

Zoya Hasan is Professor Emerita, Centre for Political Studies, Jawaharlal Nehru University.

The Wire is now on WhatsApp. Follow our channel for sharp analysis and opinions on the latest developments.