Special Intensive Revision (SIR) and the Constitutional Protection of the Right to Vote: A Comparative Legal Study of the Balance between Electoral Roll Accuracy and Citizens' Democratic Rights, with Special Reference to Bihar and West Bengal

Abstract

The foundation of a free, fair, and inclusive electoral system in India is a reliable electoral roll. The continued presence of deceased persons, duplicate entries, or other ineligible persons on electoral rolls may affect the integrity of elections. On the other hand, if the names of eligible citizens are erroneously deleted during the process of purification of electoral rolls due to faulty verification, documentary discrepancies, inadequate notice, or ineffective grievance redressal, citizens’ democratic participation may be adversely affected. The Special Intensive Revision (SIR) is an important example of this dual challenge. The present research paper examines the powers, procedural obligations, and voter rights of the Election Commission under Articles 324, 326, and 329 of the Constitution of India, the Representation of the People Act, 1950, and the Registration of Electors Rules, 1960. The empirical basis of this study comprises the SIR conducted in Bihar in 2025 and the revision process and related judicial proceedings conducted in West Bengal during 2025–2026. According to official data published by the Election Commission and the Government of India, approximately 7.89 crore electors were registered in Bihar on 24 June 2025, whereas approximately 7.24 crore electors were included in the draft electoral roll published on 1 August 2025. The final electoral roll published on 30 September 2025 recorded approximately 7.42 crore electors. In West Bengal, 7,66,37,529 electors were registered as of 27 October 2025, whereas the draft electoral roll published on 16 December 2025 recorded 7,08,16,630 electors. The press release issued by the Chief Electoral Officer of West Bengal on 28 February 2026 reported a total of 6,44,52,609 electors in the final roll. The differences among these figures must be understood in the context of the respective stages of revision, claims, objections, and cases pending adjudication. The validity of the Bihar SIR was upheld by the Supreme Court on 27 May 2026 in Association for Democratic Reforms v. Election Commission of India. In West Bengal, by contrast, separate judicial and administrative questions emerged concerning the implementation of the process, the large number of cases pending adjudication, the workload of appellate tribunals, and the functionality of the digital portal. According to reports published in September 2026 concerning information submitted by the Election Commission to the Supreme Court, approximately 38.20 lakh appeals relating to the West Bengal SIR had been filed, of which approximately 1.02 lakh had been disposed of. Reports published in October 2026 also indicated that certain tribunals had raised concerns regarding the issuance of notices, the conduct of hearings, and the restoration of names due to difficulties associated with the digital portal. Throughout this administrative process, and during the functioning of the Election Commission under the leadership of Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar, a prominent debate also emerged concerning the relationship between the Commission’s decisions and the alleged political interests and support of the current Modi Government at the Centre. Opposition leaders and parties—including Rahul Gandhi, Sanjay Singh, Mamata Banerjee, Arvind Kejriwal, and the Kakroach Janata Party (KJP)—staged strong protests against these revision exercises and levelled serious allegations that the Election Commission was working in favour of the ruling party. In contrast, the Modi Government at the Centre and the ruling Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) openly defended Gyanesh Kumar and the actions of the Election Commission, describing the exercise as a necessary measure to ensure electoral integrity. At the same time, a substantial section of the media, commonly referred to in public discourse as “Godi Media,” consistently adopted a position justifying and defending the actions of the Government and the Election Commission amid these controversies. The research examines these developments on the basis of official records of the Election Commission, judicial orders, political responses, and credible reports, classifying them according to different levels of evidentiary reliability. The central argument of the study is that electoral roll accuracy and the inclusion of eligible citizens are not mutually contradictory objectives. Achieving both requires transparent procedures, reliable verification, reasoned decisions, time-bound appeals, independent review, and publicly verifiable data.