Examine the legal framework and controversies around the **Special Intensive Revision** of electoral rolls.

The Special Intensive Revision (SIR) is the Election Commission's exercise of its statutory power to order that electoral rolls be revised intensively, in which the roll is prepared afresh rather than merely amended [1][2]. Backed by Article 324's mandate of superintendence over elections, it aims at roll purity, but its scale and process have made it legally and politically contested.

The legal framework

• Constitutional basis: Article 324 vests superintendence, direction and control of elections in the EC; roll revision flows from this plenary power [3].
• Statutory basis: the Representation of the People Act, 1950 (Section 21) empowers the EC to direct revision of rolls; Rule 25, Registration of Electors Rules, 1960 allows revision intensively, summarily, or partly each, as the EC directs [1][2].
• Accountability provision: Section 32, RP Act 1950 punishes breach of official duty by an ERO/AERO or other official in preparing or correcting rolls — but no court may take cognizance without a complaint authorised by the EC or the State Chief Electoral Officer [1].

The controversies

• Scale of deletions: a petition before the Supreme Court alleges 13 crore deletions across 30 States/UTs under SIR — a petitioner's figure, not official data — and seeks an end-to-end audit of EC databases, implying the underlying data is not otherwise open to scrutiny [4].
• Accountability gap: Section 32 is drafted for roll-level officers; a mass revision is a Commission-level policy direction, and the cognizance bar means the EC must authorise prosecution over its own instructions [1][4].
• Institutional independence: the 2023 Appointment Act's Selection Committee gives the government two of three seats, and Election Commissioners — unlike the CEC — are removable on the CEC's recommendation, weakening collegiate independence [3].

SIR rests on sound statutory footing; the deficit lies in verifiability and answerability, not in power. Publishing ground-wise deletion data in machine-readable form, and Parliament acting on the Supreme Court's Anoop Baranwal (2023) invitation to strengthen commissioners' tenure, would let roll purity and voter inclusion advance together — securing Article 326's promise of universal adult suffrage.