Bihar SIR: Latest ECI data raises more questions over higher deletions among women
Following the Supreme Court's directive, the EC released the full list of close to 65 lakh deleted voters with reasons. In a previous Datapoint in The Hindu, we found the SIR resulted in deletions of around 7 lakh more female electors compared to the rolls prepared as on January 1, 2025.
We repeated this exercise to identify constituencies with the most deletions by comparing August SIR rolls with pending enrolments released by the Bihar Chief Electoral Officer in mid-July 2025. The table below shows the top nine Assembly constituencies with the most deletions. It also mentions the number of electors deleted and exclusion reasons as a share, according to data shared on August 17.
In mobile, scroll sideways to view all columns
We had conjectured that higher deletions among women were due to higher illiteracy rates in Bihar and the inability to fill enumeration forms. But we found no correlation between illiteracy and exclusion rates in Bihar's districts.
We went on to extract the Electors Photo Identity Card (EPIC) IDs and the reasons for the deletions of all electors for these top nine ACs. Only the top nine ACs were considered, as the EC has maintained the whole set of data in image PDFs, making it onerous to extract full information.
After parsing this data, we found starker patterns in deletions among men and women across certain 'reason' and 'age cohort' categories.
The table below looks at gender-wise and reason-wise patterns among the exclusions in the top nine ACs. While there was barely any gender-difference among exclusions pertaining to 'not found', 'enrolled elsewhere as well' and 'deceased' voters, there was a stark difference in the 'permanently shifted' category. About 62.6% of those who were excluded for this reason were women compared to 37.4% who were men.
In mobile, scroll sideways to view all columns
When age cohorts were included in the analysis, we found an even more distinct pattern. The table shows the gender-wise, reason-wise, and age-wise patterns among the exclusions in the top nine ACs
In mobile, scroll sideways to view all columns
Among the 18-29 and 30-49 age cohorts, women outnumbered men three to one and two to one, respectively, in the list of exclusions under the 'permanently shifted' category, with no such noticeable differences among other categories. Which leads us to the question, is the higher deletion among women due to the exclusion of younger, married women who have shifted to other States?
Data from the 2011 Census offers us pointers. The table shows gender-wise number of people who migrated out of Bihar according to 2011 census
In mobile, scroll sideways to view all columns
Nearly 17.7 lakh women had shifted out of Bihar due to marriage, in comparison to just around 43,000 men who had done so. In contrast, 21.2 lakh men had shifted out of Bihar due to work. In comparison, just around 1.5 lakh women had done so. This led to migrant men (38.5 lakh) outnumbering women (36.02 lakh) by around 2.5 lakh overall from the State. This gap would have clearly increased in the last 14 years, as we know that male migration for work has only increased further.
That leaves the question — why have more migrant women been excluded from the SIR electoral rolls? Is this because male electors who migrated over the years were already excluded in the summary revisions in the previous years? Also, what are the implications of excluding these migrants without making sure that they are enrolled as voters in other States? Will this lead to their disenfranchisement?
The data for the tables were sourced from the Election Commission, ceoelection.bihar.gov.in and the 2011 Census. Data for gender and reasons were scraped and converted from image PDF to spreadsheets using OCR software
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Hindustan Times
3 minutes ago
- Hindustan Times
Delhi CM's attacker planned protest at Ramleela Ground against SC's stray dogs order
The man accused of attacking Delhi Chief Minister Rekha Gupta during a public hearing has told investigators that he had planned to stage a protest at Ramleela Ground here against the Supreme Court's order on relocating stray dogs, like activist Anna Hazare did over corruption issue, police sources said on Thursday. Accused Rajeshbhai Khimji also told police that he had gone to Delhi chief minister's 'Jan Sunwai' programme on Wednesday to raise the issue of stray dogs. During interrogation, accused Rajeshbhai Khimji told police about his activities to prove himself as a staunch animal lover and was upset with the apex court's recent order on stray dogs in the national capital, they said. The Delhi Police is likely to take the accused to his native place in Rajkot, Gujarat as part of ongoing investigation, the sources said, adding that his mobile phone has been sent for forensic examination to ascertain if he deleted any crucial information before the assault. The police are ascertaining the claims made by Khimji, a 41-year-old autorickshaw driver, the sources said. The accused also told police that he had gone to Delhi chief minister's 'Jan Sunwai' programme on Wednesday to raise the issue of stray dogs. "The accused attacked the chief minister after he failed to raise the issue before her. He also told us that after the recent Supreme Court order to remove stray dogs from the streets in Delhi, he had a dream in which Lord Bhairav asked him to take up the cause of the poor animals," said a police source. Lord Bhairav is an incarnation of Hindu deity Shiva whose mount (vehicle) is a black dog. Khimji was sent to police custody for five days by a local court earlier in the day. During questioning, he also told police many "stories" including that in May he was in Ayodhya where he sat on a three-day hunger strike for welfare of monkeys there, the sources said. His mobile phone showed his pictures and videos in Ayodhya, they said. The Central agencies, including the Intelligence Bureau, are also helping the Delhi Police in the investigation, the police sources said. Khimji was arrested on Wednesday after he allegedly attacked the chief minister during a public hearing at her Civil Lines camp office. He has been booked under various charges including attempt to murder. The sources said that a police team may take the accused back to his native place in Gujarat to gather more information about his background, activities and possible motives behind the attack. His travel to Delhi is also being reconstructed in detail. "From the time he boarded a train to Delhi till he reached the CM's camp office, every step will be traced. CCTV footage along his route and in areas he visited in the city will be checked. We are also collecting details of places where he stayed and if anyone he met," said another source. The forensic team will examine the mobile phone of the accused to determine whether he attempted to erase digital evidence. "Deleted photos, videos, call records or any other data pointing towards prior planning will be retrieved and analysed," said the source. The accused further told investigators that he had staged a protest in Khodaldham in Rajkot earlier this year for the welfare of stray cattle, the sources said. During questioning, he also described himself as an animal lover who had worked in several places across Gujarat and other parts of the country in connection with animal-related issues. Earlier, Khimji's mother, Bhanu Khimjibhai Sakriya, had told reporters in Rajkot that her son was a dog lover and was upset over the Supreme Court's order directing authorities in the National Capital Region to pick up stray dogs and shift them to shelters. Investigators, however, maintained that the actual motive behind the assault was yet to be ascertained as interrogation was still underway. According to police records, Khimji has five criminal cases registered against him in Gujarat, including those related to assault and creating ruckus under the influence of alcohol. The Delhi Police is probing all possible angles in the attack. "Social media activity of the accused is under scanner. We are also examining whether there was any conspiracy behind the incident. Teams will also review visuals of the incident and how much time it took the security personnel to act against the attack," the source said. The sources said the accused told police he kept around 15-20 dogs in his village and wanted to raise the issue of what he claimed was the "life of three lakh dogs" before the chief minister.
Hans India
13 minutes ago
- Hans India
Supreme Court Set To Announce Decision On Delhi's Controversial Stray Dog Mass Capture Order
The Supreme Court is scheduled to announce its decision on Friday regarding petitions seeking to suspend the controversial August 8 directive that mandated the capture of all stray dogs across Delhi and four neighboring districts including Noida, Ghaziabad, Gurugram, and Faridabad. The ruling will determine whether these animals should be confined in designated shelters indefinitely. A three-member judicial panel headed by Justice Vikram Nath, alongside Justices Sandeep Mehta and NV Anjaria, will determine the fate of the disputed order. The bench faces three primary options: completely suspending the directive, implementing modifications to address concerns raised by animal welfare organizations, or maintaining the current requirements as originally issued. The controversy began when Justices JB Pardiwala and R Mahadevan issued the sweeping August 8 order requiring the Municipal Corporation of Delhi and municipal agencies in the surrounding districts to collect all stray dogs within an eight-week timeframe. The directive explicitly prohibited the release of captured animals back onto streets, marking a significant departure from established animal welfare protocols. Under the original order, authorities received instructions to construct shelters capable of housing at least 5,000 animals within the same eight-week period. A subsequent written order issued on August 11 reinforced these requirements while incorporating additional welfare protections for animals held in custody, including provisions against mistreatment, starvation, and overcrowding. The ambitious scope of the mass capture program quickly generated intense opposition from animal rights advocates who characterized the measures as both cruel and legally problematic. Critics argued that the directive violated existing legislation, specifically the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act and the Animal Birth Control Rules, which establish different protocols for managing stray animal populations. Recognizing the mounting controversy and legal inconsistencies, Chief Justice Bhushan R Gavai took the unusual administrative step of reassigning the case from the original bench to a larger three-judge panel led by Justice Nath. This larger bench conducted extensive hearings on August 14 before reserving judgment, which will now be delivered on Friday. During those deliberations, the expanded bench expressed sharp criticism of both the Delhi government and civic authorities for their failure to implement existing regulatory frameworks designed to manage stray dog populations humanely. The court observed that while lawmakers had created comprehensive rules and regulations, enforcement remained inadequate, resulting in problems for both public safety and animal welfare. Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, representing the Delhi government, presented disturbing evidence of child injuries and fatalities resulting from dog attacks, describing these incidents as "shocking" cases of mutilation. He emphasized that immediate intervention was essential to protect public safety while maintaining that dogs should not be killed but rather separated, sterilized, and treated humanely. Mehta urged the court to develop an effective solution to address what he characterized as an escalating public health crisis. Animal welfare advocates mounted a strong counterargument through senior lawyers including Kapil Sibal, who represented NGO Project Kindness, along with Abhishek Manu Singhvi and Sidharth Luthra representing various animal rights organizations. These legal representatives argued that the August 8 directions were both illegal and impractical, contending that existing statutory requirements mandate sterilization and vaccination procedures under Animal Birth Control Rules, followed by returning animals to their original locations rather than permanent shelter confinement. The animal welfare coalition warned that implementing a time-sensitive mass capture program without adequate, properly inspected facilities would inevitably result in animal cruelty. They challenged the factual basis for the emergency measures by citing government data presented to Parliament showing no recent fatalities from dog bites in Delhi, questioning whether the situation warranted such drastic intervention. Additional Solicitor General Archana Pathak Dave, also appearing for the Delhi government, provided assurances that the administration would comply with whatever directives the court ultimately issued, regardless of whether the original order was maintained, modified, or suspended. The August 11 written directive had attempted to address animal welfare concerns by incorporating specific protections for captured dogs. These safeguards included prohibitions against mistreatment and starvation, requirements to prevent overcrowding, provisions for separating vulnerable animals, and mandates for timely veterinary care. The order also permitted adoption under strict conditions established by the Animal Welfare Board of India, while warning that any unauthorized release of adopted animals into public spaces would trigger severe consequences. The legal controversy originated from a tragic incident involving the death of a six-year-old girl from rabies following a dog bite. The original bench cited this case as evidence of "disturbing patterns" in dog-bite incidents and highlighted local agencies' apparent inability to maintain safe public spaces. This suo motu case reflected the court's concern about balancing public safety with animal welfare obligations. Thursday's proceedings saw a different bench decline an urgent listing request from an animal rights organization, effectively allowing the August 8 order to remain in effect temporarily. However, it subsequently became clear that the reserved judgment from Justice Nath's larger bench would be announced on Friday, potentially resolving the immediate uncertainty surrounding the controversial directive. The outcome of Friday's ruling will have significant implications for stray animal management policies across the National Capital Region. The decision will likely establish important precedents for balancing public safety concerns with animal welfare protections, potentially influencing similar situations in other Indian cities grappling with stray animal populations. The case has drawn widespread attention from both animal rights activists and public safety advocates, highlighting the complex challenges involved in managing urban stray animal populations. The Supreme Court's decision will determine whether the current mass capture approach continues, whether modifications can address legitimate concerns from both sides, or whether alternative approaches must be developed to protect both human safety and animal welfare in India's capital region.
Time of India
17 minutes ago
- Time of India
HC seeks reports on lack of judicial infra from Centre, Raj
Jodhpur: In a move to address the ongoing issues of inadequate judicial infrastructure across the state, a division bench of the Rajasthan High Court has summoned reports from both the central and the state govts. The order, issued Monday, has come in response to a petition filed by the Banswara Bar Association, along with six similar petitions, highlighting the persistent non-compliance with directives from the Supreme Court and the Rajasthan High Court over the past four years. A division bench comprising Justices PS Bhati and Dinesh Mehta has noted the critical nature of the matter, saying that inadequate infrastructure not only hampers daily judicial operations but also impedes the broader dispensation of justice. The court has sought a list of officers from both the state and central govts who have failed to comply with previous court orders, with a hearing scheduled for August 26 to discuss potential actions against these officials. The petitioners pointed out that the creation of new districts, some of which have been reversed, has exacerbated existing infrastructure challenges. Courts in these newly established districts, carved out of Jaisalmer, Banswara, Jodhpur and Ajmer, among others, are reportedly operating without essential facilities. Senior Advocate Sachin Acharya highlighted that 174 cases concerning land allocation for court buildings and judicial housing remain unresolved at various governmental levels. Despite a decision in May 2024 to resolve these issues within six months, progress has stalled, with 21 cases pending at the state level, 23 with the director of local bodies and 130 with district collectors. The court also noted the financial shortfall, with an estimated Rs 324.29 crore required for constructing court buildings and judges' residences, while the state govt has sanctioned only Rs 10 crore. Despite multiple court directives since Dec 2020, compliance has been lacking. The court reiterated its March 2025 order for completion within three months and emphasised the need for essential facilities such as women's toilets and childcare rooms, as directed in May 2025. Stay updated with the latest local news from your city on Times of India (TOI). Check upcoming bank holidays , public holidays , and current gold rates and silver prices in your area.
