The Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls in West Bengal has raised serious questions about the balance between cleansing voter lists and protecting the franchise. Critically analyse.

Q. The Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls in West Bengal has raised serious questions about the balance between cleansing voter lists and protecting the franchise. Critically analyse. (15 marks, 250-350 words)

Article 326 makes adult suffrage meaningful only through a roll that is both pure and inclusive. The SIR — a house-to-house revision under Section 21 of the RP Act, 1950 — pursued purity in West Bengal; its scale and sequencing show the second value came under strain.

The case for intensive revision - Statutory and constitutional mandate: roll revision flows from the RP Act, 1950 and Registration of Electors Rules, 1960, backed by the ECI's superintendence under Article 324. - Scale justifies intensity: Phase-II covered 9 States and 3 UTs, ~51 crore electors across 1,843 constituencies, with BLOs visiting households thrice to remove duplicate, shifted and deceased entries [1]. - Built-in safeguards: draft rolls invited claims and objections, Special Roll Observers supervised the exercise in major States [2], the schedule was extended to widen the window [3], and supplementary rolls admitted cleared voters till the last date of nomination [4].

Where the franchise was squeezed - Adjudication lagged deletion: of 60,06,675 cases in West Bengal, only about 20 lakh were disposed before the poll [4] — exclusion took effect before the appeal was heard. - Capacity mismatch: over 34 lakh appeals remained before 19 Appellate Tribunals after polling [5], a foreseeable surge left under-resourced. - Uneven grounds: "logical discrepancy", a ground used only in West Bengal, invites the charge of inconsistent application [5]. - Burden of proof shifts to the voter, falling hardest on migrants, the poor and married women.

Judicial review as a safety valve The Supreme Court, which had earlier permitted tribunal-cleared voters to vote, has agreed to examine whether deletions "materially affected" outcomes, with 31 seats cited where margins were narrower than deletions [5]. Article 329(b) restrains routine interference, but Articles 32 and 142 preserve a constitutional remedy.

Purity and inclusion are not rival goals; the deficit here is one of sequencing and capacity, not of purpose. Deletion should follow a reasoned, appealable order, with tribunal strength matched to caseload and revision timelines decoupled from the poll calendar — so that cleaner rolls, as Article 326 intends, enlarge rather than shrink the electorate.

(~330 words)

Sources: 1. Special Intensive Revision (SIR) Phase-II begins in 9 States and 3 UTs — PIB — Phase-II coverage, elector numbers, BLO house-to-house visits 2. ECI deploys Special Roll Observers for SIR of Electoral Rolls in major States — PIB — Special Roll Observers as a procedural safeguard 3. ECI Revises Schedule for SIR of Electoral Rolls — PIB — extension of the revision schedule 4. Chief Electoral Officer briefs media on Preparedness for General Election to the West Bengal Legislative Assembly, 2026 — PIB — 60,06,675 adjudication cases, ~20 lakh disposed, supplementary rolls 5. Will hear Trinamool pleas that deletions during SIR impacted Bengal elections — The Hindu, 12 May 2026 — 34 lakh appeals before 19 tribunals, "logical discrepancy" ground, 31 contested seats, Supreme Court hearing