‘Bihar Special Intensive Revision: An unprecedented electoral panic’

New Delhi: Bihar became a battleground for unending controversies to finalise electoral rolls. The Special Intensive Revision (SIR), issued by the Election Commission (EC), led to widespread panic and confusion among people due to the nature of the information required and the mandate for everyone to submit applications, even if already on the rolls. There is panic all around, and heaps of application forms are dumped here and there.

This chaotic situation was created by a new set of declarations and documents prescribed under the SIR, issued on 24th June 2025. Astonishingly, even existing voters are required to submit an “Enumeration Form, contained in Annexure C” of the SIR, which deviates entirely from Form 6 prescribed under Rule 13(1) of the Electoral Registration Rules, 1960, currently in vogue.

Why are citizenship-related information and documents required?

The new set of proforma under the SIR includes 11 documents, including those related to citizenship, for both existing and new voters. More importantly, the declarations require:

• Confirmation of being born in India before 01.07.1987;
• Confirmation of being born between 01.07.1987 and 02.12.2004;
• If born in India after 02.12.2004, submission of documents proving the date and place of birth of self, father, and mother, along with copies of parents’ passports/visas at the time of birth if they are not in India.
Furthermore, if born outside India, proof of birth registration issued by an Indian Mission abroad is required, and in cases of acquired Indian citizenship by registration/naturalization, a registration certificate must be attached. A list of 11 documents accompanies the declaration in the proforma.

No wonder most people, whether on the voter list or not, lack this information or the required documents. What is the net effect of this?

Can the registering officer determine citizenship?

No, they cannot. The Supreme Court, in the Lal Babu Hussain vs. Electoral Registration Officer case in 1995, categorically held that the Electoral Registration Officer (ERO) is not competent to determine whether a person is a foreigner (i.e., a non-citizen). This authority lies with the Central Government, not the ERO. This resolves the issue of Bangladeshis and Rohingyas, wherever they are in the country. If the Central Government has declared individuals non-citizens, the proper course is to move before the ERO for deletion of their names. 

The present exercise of roving and fishing inquiries is futile and has led to undue harassment. It must be made abundantly clear that unless there is material evidence against a voter and they are given notice, their name cannot be deleted. The EC’s apparent intention to make Bihar a test case, later extending to other states, which has now been done, reflects this approach.

Electoral Roll Rectification

Undisputedly, electoral rolls are crucial, especially in constituencies where victories or defeats hinge on narrow margins. All eyes are on ensuring victory in such constituencies, which can prove to be game-changers, with the help of readily available data fully reflecting caste composition and voter trends.

It seems the EC issued the SIR under pressure to rectify rolls in the wake of massive allegations of manipulations in Maharashtra, Haryana, and Delhi, where a sudden spurt in voter numbers was noticed between parliamentary and assembly elections within a short period. The preparation of rolls and conduct of elections are duly regulated by legislative action by Parliament. For the preparation of electoral rolls, the Representation of the People Act, 1950, and the Rules framed in 1960, which remain in vogue, apply.

Requiring information and documents from individuals already on the electoral rolls is an atrocity. Once entered on the rolls, a person acquires a statutory right enforceable by law. Their names can be deleted only if valid objections are raised in Form 7, or due to a change of residence, or for corrections in Form 8 under the Electoral Registration Rules, 1960. The EC cannot conduct “roving or fishing inquiries,” which appears to be the modus operandi of the SIR.

The EC announced on 19.07.2025 that it received 7,11,72,660 (90.12%) forms out of a total of 7,89,69,844 electors, meaning every person was forced to submit forms, irrespective of legal requirements. It is unclear how many innocent or illiterate individuals were left out. 

Facing a helpless situation on the ground, forms were submitted without the required documentation or declarations as per SIR requirements, and Chief Electoral Officers (CEOs) and other officials accepted them readily. Will the EC reject or accept such forms at face value to avoid further chaos and panic, or will it prevent malpractice by picking and choosing? Only time will tell.

An unimaginable amount of public money and manpower has been utilized without any meaningful achievement or rectification, except public harassment.

De Novo Exercise

If the intention is to conduct a de novo exercise to rectify electoral rolls nationwide, this piecemeal approach will not work and will lead to an even more chaotic situation for the EC to control. Bihar must serve as a sole example for the EC to understand.

The current effort is not a de novo exercise to rectify voter lists state-wise or nationwide. It is a gigantic task that must be undertaken simultaneously across the country, not in the current manner—Bihar today, West Bengal tomorrow, and Assam next. This appears to be a different game plan. The numerical sequence of the EPIC must be changed with state-specific alphabets to make it identifiable and prevent duplicate voting or voting at multiple places.

Political parties must understand that rolls cannot be rectified without their active cooperation. Local workers must conduct door-to-door surveys, raise objections if anyone is added illegally, and pursue remedies like appeals before the Assistant Registration Officer (ARO). This exercise is essential for a genuine roll, and those who fail to act will regret it later. Elections are a game of vigilance and alert action.

In past de novo preparations/revisions of electoral rolls, the responsibility for voter verification lay with the electoral machinery through door-to-door visits. Now, under the current exercise, the onus of registration, even for existing voters, has been shifted to the voters themselves.

(Disclaimer: KC Mittal is an Advocate, who formerly served as a secretary in the Legal and Human Rights Department of the All India Congress Committee. The opinions expressed in this article are solely those of the author. The facts and views presented do not reflect the position of NewsDrum.in, and NewsDrum.in assumes no responsibility or liability for the content.)