Discuss the constitutional and statutory basis of the Election Commission's power to revise electoral rolls. Examine the safeguards needed to prevent arbitrary disenfranchisement during such exercises.

The electoral roll is the legal record of the political community, and Article 324 vests its superintendence in the Election Commission of India. In Association for Democratic Reforms v. ECI (2026) the Supreme Court upheld the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) as within this mandate [2] — yet the Delhi SIR shows that power without procedural rigour risks silent disenfranchisement.

Constitutional basis

• Article 324 — plenary power of superintendence, direction and control over preparation of rolls; a constitutional function, not mere delegation from Parliament [2].
• Articles 325 and 326 — one general roll with no exclusion on grounds of religion, race, caste or sex, and universal adult suffrage; together they make inclusiveness, not merely accuracy, the constitutional test of a roll [2].

Statutory basis

• Representation of the People Act, 1950: Section 21 empowers revision of rolls, including a special revision by order of the Commission; Section 22 permits deletion only after a reasonable opportunity of being heard; Section 24 provides an appeal against the Electoral Registration Officer's order [1].
• Registration of Electors Rules, 1960 prescribe the operational procedure; the Court held SIR consistent with this statutory scheme [2].

Safeguards needed

• Reasoned notice: the ground must be disclosed, not a label. In Delhi, about a third of draft electors were flagged under undefined heads — "no mapping" and "logical discrepancies" [4].
• Speaking order after hearing before any deletion, with the burden of proof on the authority, not the elector [1].
• Transparency: publication of flagged and deleted lists in searchable form, since door-to-door verification of lakhs of entries is impracticable.
• Procedural cushions: repeated Booth Level Officer visits before declaring an elector untraceable, a full claims-and-objections window, booth-level agents of parties, and appeal to the District Magistrate and Chief Electoral Officer [3].
• An inclusive, widely-held document list and swift restoration of wrongly deleted names.

Roll purification and franchise protection are complementary, not competing, goals. If the Commission pairs its constitutional authority with disclosed reasons, accessible appeals and time-bound restoration, SIR can strengthen the very free and fair elections that Article 324 exists to secure.