Discuss the challenges of a Special Intensive Revision of electoral rolls in balancing roll purity with universal adult franchise.

Article 326 gives every citizen aged 18 the right to vote. Article 324 makes the Election Commission of India (ECI) responsible for accurate rolls. A Special Intensive Revision (SIR) rebuilds the roll house by house. It cleans the roll, but it can also exclude real voters by making them prove they are eligible.

Why SIR: the purity imperative

• Rolls collect dead, shifted and duplicate entries. The ECI calls SIR its tool for "Pure Electoral Rolls" and checks citizenship, age and ordinary residence [1].
• In ADR v. ECI (2026), the SC traced SIR to Section 21(3), RP Act read with Article 324. It held the exercise proportionate to the goal of restoring roll integrity [2].

Challenges to universal adult franchise

• Burden of proof reversed: Bihar electors not on the 2003 roll had to produce documents. The SC had to order the ECI to add Aadhaar (Sept 2025) [2]. The ECI treats Aadhaar as proof of identity only, not of citizenship [1].
• Documentary exclusion: migrants, poor households and first-time voters are the least likely to have old papers. They are pushed into a slower queue that depends on documents.
• Citizenship test by proxy: the ECI may hold only a "limited enquiry" into citizenship. Final decisions belong to the authority under the Citizenship Act, 1955 [2]. If that line blurs, citizens can lose their vote without due process.
• Unstable eligibility rules: an SIR-linked declaration was added to the online Form 6, which new voters use to register. The SC said it had neither made nor approved this change [3]. Eligibility questions thus changed without notified amendments to the rules.
• Administrative strain: SIR schedules were revised in six States/UTs [4], showing how hard time-bound mass re-enumeration is.
• Trust deficit: petitions allege the CEC acted alone, without the other Commissioners [3], which weakens faith in the umpire.

Striking the balance

• Due process: notice and hearing before deletion (Rule 21A, 1960 Rules). Wrongful deletions can be taken to court, and citizenship referrals must be decided before the next election [2].
• Uniform, notified forms across States, and Aadhaar-based identity checks instead of ancestry tests.
• Institutional capacity: an independent ECI secretariat, as the Goswami Committee recommended [5].

SIR is a legitimate constitutional tool, but whether it is fair depends on how it is done. A roll that is both clean and complete needs presumptions that favour inclusion and transparent, rule-based procedures. Getting both right would honour Article 326 and the goal of inclusive decision-making under SDG 16.7.