Electoral roll purification and universal adult franchise must be balanced, not traded off. Critically examine.

Article 326 gives every eligible adult the right to vote, and Article 324 gives the ECI control over the rolls that make that right real. In 2026 the Supreme Court upheld Bihar's Special Intensive Revision (SIR). It framed the case as two concerns: no eligible citizen should be excluded, and the roll must reflect the true electorate [1]. The two goals support each other and do not compete.

Case for purification

• Stale rolls: Bihar's last intensive revision was in 2003. For two decades after that, its rolls were only updated through summary revisions, despite urbanisation and migration [1].
• Ghost entries: The ECI flagged about 22 lakh deceased voters, 36 lakh shifted or untraceable voters and 7 lakh multiple enrolments [1]. Such entries open the door to impersonation and dilute genuine votes.
• Legal footing: Article 324 read with Section 21(3), RP Act, 1950 allows a special revision [1].
• Due process: Before any deletion there must be a show-cause notice and a reasoned order, with appeals to the DM and then the CEO [1].

Concerns for universal franchise

• Burden on the voter: Nearly 65 lakh electors were left out of the draft roll only because they did not submit the enumeration form [1]. Not returning a form does not prove a person is ineligible. Migrants and the poor are hit hardest.
• Document barrier: At first only 11 documents were accepted. Aadhaar was added as a 12th document, for identity and not citizenship, only after the Court stepped in [1].
• Transparency forced by the Court: The list of excluded names, with reasons, was published only after an SC order of 14.08.2025 [1].
• Scale: Phase-II covered about 51 crore electors in 9 States and 3 UTs within a short enumeration window [2], which increases the risk of errors.

Assessment: safeguards make balance possible

• At the claims stage, 21.53 lakh eligible electors were added and 3.66 lakh more were deleted. The final roll had 7.42 crore electors [1]. The process corrected the draft rather than simply purging names.

Way forward

• Presume inclusion. Check citizenship only where there is a specific doubt, so the burden stays on the State.
• Publish deletions with reasons in every State on the ECI's own initiative.
• Use legal-aid support. Paralegal volunteers from legal services authorities, as deployed in Bihar [1], can help voters file claims.

Purification without inclusion shrinks democracy, and inclusion without purification empties it of meaning. An electoral roll that is "accurate, inclusive, and legally valid" [1], kept up through transparent and voter-friendly processes, fulfils both Article 326 and SDG 16.7's goal of inclusive, participatory decision-making.