"Electoral roll purification must not come at the cost of disenfranchisement." Critically examine this in the context of the Special Intensive Revision of electoral rolls.

An accurate electoral roll is the foundation of free and fair elections. The Supreme Court has held that the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) is valid under Article 324 read with Section 21(3) of the RP Act, 1950 [4][5]. SIR now covers 20 States/UTs [1]. The controversy is less about the ECI's power to clean the rolls and more about the price paid in wrongful exclusion.

Case for purification

• Legal and proportionate: In ADR v. ECI (2026), the Court found SIR proportionate, with notice-and-hearing safeguards kept intact [4].
• Roll integrity: Dead, shifted and duplicate entries distort elections. Bihar's roll fell from 7.89 crore to 7.42 crore after SIR [3].
• Scale and inclusion safeguards: Phase II covered about 51 crore electors and used over 5.3 lakh BLOs, with a month-long claims-and-objections window [2]. The ECI says its phased design includes safeguards to protect eligible voters [6].
• Self-correction: In Bihar, about 21.53 lakh eligible electors were added after the draft roll [3].

Risk of disenfranchisement

• Remedy lags behind deletion: In West Bengal, only 1,607 of about 22 lakh appellants were reinstated before the April poll [1]. A right to appeal did not become a right to vote.
• Vulnerable groups: Migrants, the poor and women whose names changed after marriage find documentary proof hardest to produce. Aadhaar was added only by a court order [4].
• Citizenship overlap: The Court had to clarify that an ECI enquiry cannot finally decide citizenship. Doubtful cases must be referred to the competent authority [4].
• Trust deficit: A plea now seeks an independent panel of former judges and retired CECs to inquire into SIR, and a stay on further proceedings [1].

Way forward

• Publish booth-wise deletion lists with reasons.
• Decide appeals before the next election, as the Court directed [4]. Keep appellants on the roll while their appeals are pending.
• Increase tribunal capacity and do not schedule SIR close to polls.

Overall, SIR is a legitimate way to clean the rolls, but the West Bengal appeal backlog shows it can still shut out eligible voters in practice. The ECI should treat a wrongful deletion as seriously as a bogus entry, through time-bound appeals, disclosure and a presumption in favour of inclusion. That would keep the promise of universal adult suffrage under Article 326.