SIR and the silent disenfranchisement of India’s poor and migrant voters

By Hementkumar Shah* 

Before the Bihar Assembly elections, the Election Commission undertook a Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of the electoral rolls. The Commission has declared the program a success, and from October 27, 2025, it has been extended to nine states and three union territories, including Gujarat. 

Exercising its constitutional powers under Article 324 and provisions of the Representation of the People Act, 1951 (Section 21), the Election Commission has initiated this revision process in 321 districts and 1,843 assembly constituencies across the country. It began on November 4, 2025, and will continue till December 4, 2025. The final electoral roll will be published by February 7, 2026.

According to the Press Information Bureau’s statement dated November 4, 2025, every registered voter as of October 27, 2025, will receive a pre-filled form from the Booth Level Officer (BLO), who will visit each household at least three times to verify and collect details. Citizens can also verify their names and details at voters.eci.gov.in or through the ECI Net App or the toll-free number 1950.

However, this process raises important concerns about accessibility and fairness. Not all citizens, especially in rural or remote areas, have reliable internet access. Many may be unable to check the website or use the app. Even the toll-free number may not work consistently. This puts technologically and economically disadvantaged citizens at risk of being excluded.

The Constitution of India, in its preamble, declares the country a democratic republic where citizens govern through elected representatives. Article 326 grants the right to vote to every citizen aged 18 or above, except those disqualified due to insanity, criminal conviction, or corruption. The law thus guarantees that every eligible citizen must be included in the voters’ list.

The Representation of the People Act, 1950, and the Registration of Electors Rules, 1960, clearly state that a person’s name can be removed from the rolls only after due procedure — through verification, public notice, and opportunity for objection. The Supreme Court, in the 1995 Lal Babu Hussain judgment, affirmed that these procedures are mandatory.

Yet, during the SIR, the Election Commission seems to have reversed the burden of proof. Instead of the Commission verifying citizenship, it is now asking registered voters themselves to prove that they are Indian citizens. This contradicts the law and the Inderjit Barua Supreme Court ruling, which held that the onus to prove non-citizenship lies with the authority, not the voter.

Further controversy arises from the Commission’s arbitrary decision to use 2003 as the “cut-off year” — meaning only those whose names appeared in the 2003 rolls will be presumed eligible. This decision lacks legal basis. It disregards 22 years of additions and changes to the rolls, effectively questioning the citizenship of millions who became voters after 2003. The logic appears politically motivated, feeding into narratives about “illegal infiltrators,” raising fears of mass disenfranchisement.

The Commission has listed eleven documents acceptable as proof of citizenship, including government employment certificates, birth certificates, passports, property papers, and caste certificates. Strangely, Aadhaar cards, ration cards, and voter ID cards — all officially issued by the government — are not considered valid proof, despite a July 2025 Supreme Court ruling recognizing them as legitimate identity documents.

In Bihar’s SIR, 6.5 million names were deleted from the rolls between June and August 2025. The Election Commission claimed deaths, migration, and duplication as reasons. Yet many political parties reported not receiving the lists of deleted names, and citizens were given no chance to appeal before deletion — again violating the law and Supreme Court orders.

Such hasty and opaque revisions can lead to large-scale disenfranchisement of migrant workers. India has over 15 crore internal migrants, according to India Data Map and the World Economic Forum. Many live far from their registered constituencies and may miss BLO visits. Journalistic investigations by Ajit Anjum and others in Bihar have already documented BLOs filling forms without voters’ presence, including for deceased persons — a disturbing sign of administrative manipulation.

Beyond administrative lapses, the issue touches the core of human and constitutional rights. The Universal Declaration of Human Rights (Articles 1, 19, and 21) guarantees equality, freedom of expression, and participation in governance. If citizens are stripped of voting rights without due process, it violates their dignity and equality before law.

The Indian Constitution’s Articles 14, 19(1)(a), and the Preamble guarantee equality, freedom of expression, and equal opportunity in public affairs. Denying these to citizens — especially poor and migrant voters — undermines the democratic foundation of the Republic.

The Election Commission must therefore ensure that its SIR process remains transparent, inclusive, and constitutional. Any attempt that risks disenfranchising millions, under the guise of “revision,” would be a grave betrayal of democracy itself.

---

*Senior economist based in Ahmedabad. This article is the abridged version of the author's original Gujarati article