&w=3840&q=100)
SC tells ECI to publish list of 6.5 mn deleted Bihar voters with reasons
The Supreme Court on Thursday directed the Election Commission of India (ECI) to upload the names of around 6.5 million voters removed from Bihar's electoral rolls, along with the reasons for their removal. The court said the information must be made public so that every voter can access it easily, Bar and Bench reported.
A Bench of Justices Surya Kant and Joymalya Bagchi passed the directions while hearing petitions challenging the ECI's June 24 directive for a Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls in the poll-bound state.
'Reason for deletion must be public'
During the hearing, Justice Surya Kant said that the ECI had said 2.2 million out of the 6.5 million removed voters were dead. 'If 2.2 million people have died, why is it not disclosed at the booth level? If it comes in the public domain, then that narrative will disappear,' he said.
Justice Bagchi stressed the importance of transparency, saying, 'Departure of suo motu deletion is not permissible... The exception is special circumstances. That also allows a window for appeal against such deletions. The fundamental right to know why deleted requires the widest possible publicity.'
Interim directions by the court
The Bench recorded that the ECI agreed to take the following steps as an interim measure:
• List of 6.5 million voters removed from the 2025 rolls but missing in the draft rolls will be uploaded on every district election officer's website.
• The list must mention the reason for each deletion
• Wide publicity will be given in newspapers with the highest circulation in local languages, on Doordarshan, and other television channels.
• District election officers with social media accounts must post the list there too.
• The booth-wise list will also be displayed on notice boards in all panchayat bhawans, block development offices, and panchayat offices so people can check them manually.
• Aggrieved persons may file claims along with a copy of their Aadhaar cards.
Justice Kant read out that these steps aim to ensure easy and direct access for voters.
Push for more transparency
Justice Bagchi urged the ECI to upload the entire dataset online so people could check their names independently. 'What we are asking is to be more transparent. We are saying that instead of this, put the entire data set on the website,' he said.
Justice Kant added that the website should allow searches by EPIC number so voters can directly confirm their details.
ECI's stand and petitioners' concerns
Senior advocate Rakesh Dwivedi, representing the ECI, told the court: '6.5 million are not there, 2.2 million are dead.' He clarified that no name had been deleted without following due process and that anyone wrongly marked as dead could approach officials for correction.
Why the SIR was ordered
The ECI has defended the June 24 directive, saying it is empowered to carry out such revisions under Article 324 of the Constitution and Section 21(3) of the Representation of the People Act, 1950.
It said the exercise was needed because:
• Urban migration and demographic changes had created inaccuracies.
• Voter list had not been intensively revised for almost 20 years.
According to the ECI, the SIR is vital to ensure that only eligible voters remain on the rolls before the Bihar Assembly elections.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
New Indian Express
21 minutes ago
- New Indian Express
Demography Mission rollout amid raging debate over SIR
NEW DELHI: Prime Minister Narendra Modi announced on Friday that his government would soon set up a high-powered demography mission to deal with unlawful entry of foreign nationals in the country. The announcement comes in the wake of the Opposition's allegations that the BJP is 'misusing' the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls in Bihar to target immigrants, especially those belonging to the minority community. In his Independence Day speech delivered from the ramparts of the Red Fort, Modi noted that India's forefathers made the supreme sacrifice to win freedom for the countrymen, and it is the duty of its citizens not to accept such influx of illegal foreign nationals. 'Today I want to alert the country about a concern, a challenge. Under a well-thought-out conspiracy, the demography of the country is being changed. Seeds of a new crisis are being sown. These 'ghuspaithiya' (intruders) are snatching the livelihood of the youth of my country, these 'ghuspaithiya' are targeting the sisters and daughters of my country and this will not be tolerated. These 'ghuspaithiya' are misleading the innocent tribals and grabbing their land. This country will not tolerate this,' Modi asserted.
Hans India
21 minutes ago
- Hans India
Stagnant politics, fresh chaos – Opposition's I-Day gift to the nation
The Rahul Gandhi-led INDIA bloc's 'Vote Chori' storm is political theatre, masking fear of a Special Intensive Revision (SIR) that could expose fake voters, including illegal migrants. Their obstruction in Parliament, petty vendettas, intolerance to dissent, and hollow cries of 'Save Democracy' reveal a deeper aim — to pre-empt electoral defeat. While ignoring vital debates on defence, GST reforms, and governance, they chase headlines with stunts like exploiting Minta Devi without consent. The Election Commission must ignore such noise, conduct a transparent nationwide SIR, and protect electoral integrity. True democracy needs facts, not theatrics — and the voters, not politicians, will have the final say. One may like or dislike Prime Minister Narendra Modi, but there are lessons to learn from him. Ignore those unwilling to change. Give no quarter to peddlers of false narratives. And do not dignify Congress and the Rahul Gandhi-led INDIA bloc's 'Vote Chori' drama — a spectacle more about theatrics than truth — with endless rebuttals. Their posturing on electoral integrity rings hollow, given the glaring irregularities during their own 54 years in power. Modi chooses to counter the Opposition from appropriate platforms, connecting directly with people rather than indulging in endless 'Tu Tu Mein Mein.' By contrast, the Opposition shamelessly held Parliament hostage for 19 days, recycling the same accusations, staging protests inside and outside, refusing debates — and then claiming democracy is under threat. This isn't about saving democracy. It's about saving political careers. The Opposition refuses to shed its stale, failed narrative — the same approach that buried the Left — and treats Parliament as enemy territory. This obstructionism is itself becoming a threat to democracy. Consider the GST reforms bill, which could be a genuine Diwali gift to the citizens. Or the Sudarshan Chakra defence system — a multi-layered shield using advanced technology to protect strategic sites. These are serious matters worthy of debate. Instead, the Opposition fixates on the SIR (Special Intensive Revision) of electoral rolls, fearing it will expose bogus voters — particularly ahead of the Bihar elections. On Agni veers too, their politics is petty. Agni veers played a vital role in Operation Sindoor. Yet Rahul Gandhi declared in Parliament, 'We will do away with Agni veers.' Which means we will allow the enemy to get strengthened. His stance echoes Y S Jagan Mohan Reddy's destructive vendetta politics in Andhra Pradesh — undoing the good solely to spite political rivals. The Leader of Opposition in utter disregard for parliamentary practices prefers addressing fellow Opposition MPs as if at a CWC meeting, instead of addressing the Chair. True leaders refine policies for better results. But here are politicians who dismantle useful schemes, grant the government a free run, and then claim credit for 'exposing' it. Their hypocrisy is breathtaking. They allege their freedom of speech is curtailed but will not tolerate dissent within their own ranks. Rahul forced Karnataka CM Siddaramaiah to sack minister K N Rajanna for pointing out that the voter rolls Rahul questioned were prepared when Congress was in power and questioning bluntly, 'Why was everyone silent back then.' This exposed the hollowness of Rahul who alleged that over a lakh bogus voters existed in Mahadevpura, which cost the Congress the seat while the fact is that it has been a traditional BJP stronghold. Samajwadi Party chief Akhilesh Yadav showed similar intolerance by expelling MLA Pooja Pal for praising Yogi Adityanath's role in bringing mafia don Atiq Ahmed to justice for murdering her husband on the ninth day of her marriage. Unable to admit the real reason for fear of losing minority votes, Akhilesh cited a year-old whip violation. Pal's words were clear: 'I am a victim first… All people in Prayagraj disturbed by Atiq Ahmed have been given justice by the CM. I stand by my statement.' I have been saying this from day 1, even when I was in the party. I have been expelled only today, she added. She said perhaps her party could not hear the women in Prayagraj who were even more worried than her. 'But I am their voice, I have been elected as an MLA and sent to the Assembly. I am the voice of mothers and sisters who have lost their loved ones. The INDIA bloc's pettiness extends to objecting to the Operation Sindhoor logo on Independence Day invitations, and to three lady officers — Colonel Sophia Qureshi, Wing Commander Vyomika Singh, and Commander Prerna Deosthalee — appearing on Kaun Banega Crorepati. It may be a commercial show, but it violates no military ethics. These officers will inspire young Indians, especially women, just as doctors used the platform during Covid-19. For Congress, Independence Day seems to be about celebrating itself — as if only it delivered freedom. While Congress played a central and indispensable role in India's fight for independence, many groups and individuals contributed to the freedom struggle. Another example of lack of strategy is Rahul Gandhi's refusal to authenticate the so-called 'atom bomb' voter list document is telling. His excuse — that he needn't sign because he has already taken an MP's oath — is laughable. Rule 389 of the Lok Sabha's Rules of Procedure is clear: when a member quotes a document, the Speaker can demand authentication. An oath is no licence to bypass verification — just as a court wouldn't accept 'I took an oath once' instead of a signed affidavit. The Opposition fears the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) as it fears that they will lose the votes of illegal Bangladeshi migrants and the like. Fake voter entries and deletion of genuine ones are not new. The Election Commission of India (ECI) must seize this golden opportunity to rise above the political noise and conduct a transparent nationwide SIR. The process should be free from distractions, as political cry-babies will always cry, but voters deserve accuracy and integrity in the rolls that decide their future. But the opposition believes only in theaatrics. On August 12, they paraded in T-shirts reading 'Minta Devi 124 Not Out.' But Minta Devi herself spoiled the show, saying her voter details were already being corrected, and objecting to her photo being used without consent. This was political self-sabotage at its finest. Will they apologise? Unlikely. For Rahul, removing stray dogs from streets is 'inhuman' — but exploiting a poor woman for political gain is acceptable. Now the INDIA bloc plans a nationwide 'Vote Chori' agitation and signature campaign, even demanding Lok Sabha's dissolution. Yet will they explain why Sonia Gandhi's name appeared on voter rolls in 1980 when she was still an Italian citizen? Most damning, in the past 12 days, not one booth-level or block-level agent from these parties has filed a complaint with the ECI about bogus voting. They've found nothing wrong in practice — yet they howl in public. This is no longer petty politics; it's a deliberate attempt to undermine faith in India's elections so that when defeat comes — as it has repeatedly over the past decade — they can cry foul at the referee. From 'Chowkidar Chor Hai' to 'Vote Chori,' Rahul Gandhi's playbook is the same: make a headline-grabbing allegation, milk it in the media, avoid proof, and quietly drop it when facts fail to fit. In the process, they corrode the very institutions they claim to defend. The ECI must now move fast: clean the rolls, strengthen verification, ensure absolute transparency — and refuse to be distracted by political drama. This is about protecting democracy, not from imaginary 'vote thieves' but from those who cry 'Save Democracy' while undermining it. And perhaps the INDIA bloc's real panic is simpler: they can already see defeat looming in Bihar. The voters, as always, will deliver the final verdict. (The author is former Chief Editor of The Hans India)
Hans India
21 minutes ago
- Hans India
Bihar's electoral overhaul: Balancing integrity and inclusion in India's democracy
The Election Commission of India's (ECI) recent initiative to undertake a Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls in Bihar has ignited a fervent debate, blending legal imperatives with political undercurrents. Announced in June, this comprehensive exercise, the first of its kind in the state since 2003, aims to update voter lists with July 1, 2025, as the qualifying date. With Bihar's Assembly elections looming later this year, the timing has amplified concerns about potential disenfranchisement, particularly among migrant workers and marginalized communities. Yet, at its core, the SIR represents a statutory effort to safeguard the sanctity of India's democratic process—one that demands a balanced scrutiny of its legal foundations, procedural rigor, and societal impacts. The ECI's authority to conduct such revisions is firmly rooted in the Constitution. Article 324 grants the Commission sweeping powers over the 'superintendence, direction, and control' of elections, including the preparation and maintenance of accurate electoral rolls. This is reinforced by Article 326, which enshrines universal adult suffrage, entitling every Indian citizen aged 18 or above—barring disqualifications like non-residence or criminal convictions—to vote. These provisions underscore a commitment to inclusivity while empowering the ECI to eliminate inaccuracies that could undermine electoral fairness. Parliament has translated these constitutional ideals into actionable law through the Representation of the People Act, 1950. Section 21 of the Act explicitly authorizes the ECI to prepare and revise electoral rolls, a process elaborated in the Registration of Electors Rules, 1960. Under Rule 25, revisions can be intensive, summary, or hybrid, allowing flexibility based on need. An intensive revision, as chosen for Bihar, involves meticulous steps outlined in Rules 4 to 23, including door-to-door enumeration and verification. This ensures thoroughness, requiring enumerators to collect details from households and cross-check against a list of 11 specified documents, such as passports, driving licenses, or ration cards—expanded from seven in previous exercises, which the Supreme Court has noted as a 'voter-friendly' measure. The rationale for reviving an intensive approach after over two decades is straightforward yet profound. Bihar's population has surged, with urbanisation and migration reshaping its demographics. The 2003 revision, the last comprehensive one, predates significant shifts, including the exodus of millions for work opportunities elsewhere. Bogus entries—deceased voters, duplicates, or those who have relocated—persist as a perennial threat, potentially distorting outcomes and violating the 'one person, one vote' principle. The ECI's drive seeks to purge these anomalies while enrolling new voters, especially the youth turning 18. As of July 12, over 74 per cent of Bihar's approximately 7.9 crore electors had submitted enumeration forms, indicating robust participation in the process. This high response rate suggests the exercise is gaining traction, though challenges remain in reaching remote or transient populations. However, SIR has not escaped controversy. Critics, including civil society groups, allege it risks mass exclusion, with reports emerging of draft rolls containing errors like incorrect photographs or entries for deceased individuals. Petitions before the Supreme Court, led by the Association for Democratic Reforms (ADR), claim that around 65 lakh names were omitted from the draft roll without adequate justification, disproportionately affecting migrants, the poor, and minorities. These groups argue that the process violates statutory rights, as voters have a legal entitlement to remain on rolls unless proven ineligible. The exclusion of Aadhaar as a verification document has been praised for broadening options but questioned for its potential to complicate verification in a state where digital access varies. In response, the ECI has emphasised that SIR is a routine purification effort, not a deletion drive. It has assured the Supreme Court that no name will be removed without prior notice, a reasoned order, and appeal rights. The Commission maintains that it is not legally obligated to publish a separate list of excluded voters or reasons for omissions, viewing the draft roll as a provisional document open to corrections. During ongoing hearings, the apex court has sought details on the 2003 revision's methodology, signalling a desire for transparency in historical precedents. Notably, while individual voters have filed thousands of objections, no recognized political party has formally flagged errors in the draft, per ECI reports. This absence of partisan complaints underscores that the controversy may stem more from apprehension than widespread malpractice. The debate extends beyond Bihar, highlighting systemic tensions in India's electoral framework. Similar revisions in other states, like Andhra Pradesh and Telangana in recent years, have faced scrutiny for alleged biases, yet they have ultimately bolstered roll accuracy. The political stakes are high in Bihar: the state's 243 Assembly seats could see shifts if migrant voters—estimated at over two crore—are underrepresented. Demographic data from the 2011 Census, adjusted for growth, reveals that Scheduled Castes and Muslims, often economically vulnerable, form significant voter blocs; any perceived exclusion could erode trust in the system. Objectively, the ECI's actions align with global best practices for electoral hygiene. Countries like the United States and the United Kingdom periodically purge rolls to combat fraud, though with safeguards against voter suppression. In India, the ECI's recent delisting of 334 Registered Unrecognized Political Parties (RUPPs) as part of broader clean-up efforts reflects a proactive stance against electoral malpractices. However, implementation on the ground matters. House-to-house surveys, while thorough, can be susceptible to human error or bias in a polarized environment. Enhancing digital tools, such as the Voter Helpline app, could mitigate this, allowing self-verification and reducing dependency on enumerators. The Supreme Court's observations in related matters offer valuable guidance. In the ADR vs. ECI case on electronic voting machines, the court cautioned against 'blind distrust' that breeds scepticism, urging evidence-based reforms and trust-building through dialogue and transparency. As echoed in Paragraph 37 of that judgment, democracy thrives on harmony among citizens, judiciary, representatives, and electoral bodies. Para 38 expresses hope that the system will reflect the electorate's true mandate. These principles apply aptly here: while the ECI's authority to decide the timing and mode of SIR is exclusive, fostering public confidence requires proactive disclosure and inclusive outreach. Bihar's SIR embodies the delicate balance between electoral purity and inclusivity. Legally sound and procedurally robust, it addresses long-standing flaws in voter lists, yet its success hinges on equitable execution. As petitions unfold in the Supreme Court, stakeholders must prioritize evidence over rhetoric. A transparent, participatory process will not only fortify Bihar's upcoming polls but also reinforce India's democratic resilience. By embracing continuous improvement, as the apex court advocates, we can ensure every eligible voice is heard, unmarred by doubt or exclusion. (The writer is a senior Advocate)
