Discuss the constitutional and statutory basis of the Special Intensive Revision of electoral rolls. How can the goal of clean rolls be balanced against the risk of disenfranchisement?

The Special Intensive Revision (SIR) is a fresh, house-to-house re-verification of electoral rolls. It began in Bihar with 1 July 2025 as the qualifying date [1]. Its legal basis is sound, but whether it is seen as legitimate depends on whether genuine voters stay on the roll.

Constitutional basis

• Article 324 gives the ECI "superintendence, direction and control" over preparing electoral rolls. The ECI relied on it to order the SIR [1].
• Article 325 provides one general roll per constituency and bars exclusion on grounds of religion, race, caste or sex.
• Article 326 guarantees adult suffrage: every citizen aged 18 or above is entitled to be registered.

Statutory basis: RP Act, 1950

• Section 21(3) lets the ECI order a special revision at any time, for reasons it records [1].
• Sections 16 and 19 disqualify non-citizens and set the age and ordinary-residence conditions.
• Section 23(4) recognises Aadhaar as an identity document [2]. Section 24 provides appeals against decisions of the Electoral Registration Officer (ERO).

Why clean rolls matter

• Dead, duplicate and shifted names make honest votes count for less and allow impersonation. Section 21 makes keeping rolls accurate a legal duty [1].

Risks of disenfranchisement

• Burden of proof moves to the voter. Electors who are not on the 2003 roll must produce documents [1]. This hits migrants, young voters and the poor hardest.
• A roll check can turn into a citizenship check. Asking for citizenship papers makes the ERO act like a citizenship authority.
• The gaps involve real people. Even when documents had come in from 98.2% of Bihar's electors, about 1 in 50 had still not submitted them [3].

Way forward

• Inclusive documents: accept Aadhaar as proof of identity in every SIR State, as the Supreme Court directed on 8 September 2025. Officials can still check that a card is genuine, but Aadhaar is not proof of citizenship [2].
• Due process: give individual notice and a hearing before any deletion, as the Supreme Court required in Lal Babu Hussein (1995).
• Transparency: publish deletion lists booth by booth with reasons, and offer a time-bound way to get back on the roll.
• Outreach: use Booth Level Officers (BLOs), special camps and online Form 6 to reach migrants.
• Institutional neutrality: give the ECI an independent secretariat, as the Goswami Committee recommended, so it relies less on State government staff [4].

The SIR stands on firm constitutional and statutory ground. Clean rolls and universal franchise support each other. If the SIR uses inclusive documents, proper procedure and open records, it can give rolls that are both accurate and trusted. That would honour Article 326 and SDG 16.7's goal of inclusive, participatory decision-making.