·The Hindu·15 marks·250–350 wordsPolity

Balancing electoral roll integrity with protection against wrongful disenfranchisement is a key governance challenge. Suggest safeguards for intensive revisions of electoral rolls.

New · District CollectorCan you hold the district for 72 hours?Floods, a heatwave, an outbreak, a grievance queue. Take the decisions, see the consequences.Play →
In this answer
  1. The Balancing Challenge
  2. Suggested Safeguards

Article 326 gives the vote to every adult citizen. Section 21(3) of the RP Act, 1950 lets the ECI order a special revision of rolls "for recorded reasons" [1]. Bihar's 2025 Special Intensive Revision (SIR) showed that cleaning the rolls and protecting genuine voters must be planned together.

The Balancing Challenge

  • Integrity need: enumeration flagged about 22.34 lakh dead and 7.01 lakh multiply-enrolled electors. Such entries dilute every honest vote [3].
  • Exclusion risk: the largest category was about 36.28 lakh "permanently shifted/absent" electors [3]. It rests on field visits and can sweep in seasonal migrants, who remain citizens.
  • Precedent: in Lal Babu Hussein v. ERO (1995), the Supreme Court examined a drive against "suspected foreigners" on the rolls [1]. The 2026 SIR verdict reads that case as giving names already on the roll a presumption of citizenship [2].

Suggested Safeguards

Procedural

  • No deletion without notice, a hearing and a reasoned order. Section 22 already requires a reasonable opportunity of being heard [1]. This should be written into the Registration of Electors Rules for every SIR.
  • Publish all draft-roll exclusions with reasons, booth-wise and online, so that voters and parties can object in time.

Documentary

  • Treat the document list as illustrative, not exhaustive. Accept Aadhaar as proof of identity, though not of citizenship, as the 2026 verdict held [2]. Accept local records for poor households.

Institutional

  • EROs should refer genuine citizenship doubts to the authority under the Citizenship Act, 1955, and keep the name on the roll until it decides. The verdict permits only a "limited" inquiry by the ECI [2].
  • Make appeals to the Chief Electoral Officer [1] time-bound and back them with legal-aid support.

Legislative and field-level

  • Amend the RP Act, 1950 to define when a statewide SIR may be ordered, its minimum duration and a cut-off date before general elections.
  • Require a second Booth Level Officer visit or phone contact before marking anyone "shifted". Set up migrant help desks in source districts.

A clean roll and an inclusive roll go together; neither should be traded for the other. If the State, not the voter, carries the burden of justifying a deletion, and transparency and legislative clarity are added, intensive revisions can become credible. That would honour Article 326's promise of universal adult franchise and SDG 16.7's call for inclusive, participatory decision-making.

Sources

  1. 1Supreme Court of India, *Lal Babu Hussein & Ors. v. Electoral Registration Officer & Ors.* (06/02/1995)Section 21(3) special revision for recorded reasons; Section 22 hearing requirement; appeal to the Chief Electoral Officer; the drive against suspected foreigners
  2. 2Supreme Court of India, *Association for Democratic Reforms v. Election Commission of India*, 2026 INSC 564 (27 May 2026)presumption of citizenship for names on the roll; illustrative document list; Aadhaar for identity, not citizenship; "limited" citizenship inquiry
  3. 3PIB: Bihar SIR, Key Findings of Enumeration Phase (24 June–25 July 2025)22.34 lakh dead, 36.28 lakh permanently shifted/absent, 7.01 lakh multiply-enrolled electors
Practice
8 questions on this article
Check the answer for each question, or reveal all at once.
Practice MCQs →

More from this note

More on Polity