Discuss the scope of the Election Commission's power under Section 21(3) of the RP Act, 1950. How can the purity of electoral rolls be reconciled with the right of every eligible citizen to stay on them?

Article 324 gives the Election Commission of India (ECI) control over electoral rolls. Section 21(3) of the RP Act, 1950 adds the power to order a special revision of any roll, with reasons recorded. The Special Intensive Revisions (SIR) in Bihar (2025) and Delhi (2026) show that this power is wide. They also show it must stay within the right to vote under Article 326.

Scope of the power

• Wide discretion: The ECI can revise any constituency, or part of one, in any manner it thinks fit. Bihar's SIR was ordered under Article 324 and Section 21, with 1 July 2025 as the qualifying date. It was Bihar's first intensive revision since 2003 [1].
• Reasoned, not arbitrary: The reasons recorded were urbanisation, migration, unreported deaths and foreign illegal immigrants [1].
• Judicially affirmed: In 2026 INSC 564 (27 May 2026), the Supreme Court upheld the SIR power. It relied on notice, hearing, speaking orders and appeals as safeguards [2].
• Statutory checks: The Electoral Registration Officer (ERO) decides claims. Appeals lie to the District Magistrate and the Chief Electoral Officer under Section 24 [1].

Where purity collides with inclusion

• Scale of the burden: In Delhi, 33.12 lakh of 97.54 lakh electors (about 34%) received notices [3].
• Algorithmic bias: The ECI's central ERONET software flagged "logical discrepancies", not the EROs. Muslims are 13.6% of Delhi's electors but made up 20.3% of these flags. They were 30% of the family-size flags [3]. This points to indirect discrimination.
• Contrast: Bihar had no such check. There, Muslim deletions (18.4%) were close to the Muslim share of the population (17.7%) [3].

Reconciling the two

• Transparency: Publish all flag rules and the lists of flagged electors.
• Impact audits: Test each rule for unequal effects on groups. Drop rules that wrongly flag many genuine voters.
• Burden on the State: Require a reasoned ERO order before any deletion. A bare "discrepancy" label should not be enough [2]. Verify documents at the voter's doorstep.
• Outcome data: Publish flags, clearances and deletions for each booth.
• Repair: Run re-enrolment drives after the SIR, focused on localities with high flag rates.

Section 21(3) gives the ECI the flexibility it needs to keep rolls accurate. Its legitimacy depends on fair procedure. Open rules, audited software and reasoned human decisions can make rolls both accurate and inclusive. This upholds universal adult franchise under Article 326 and the guarantee of equality under Article 14.