Patna: Bihar simmered in anger on Wednesday, July 9, as Opposition parties hit the streets to oppose the Election Commission of India's (ECI) ongoing Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of the state's electoral rolls. Protesters blocked highways, disrupted rail traffic, and even clashed with the police in various districts across the state, accusing the Commission of attempting to disenfranchise marginalised communities under the guise of voter verification.
Congress MP Rahul Gandhi, along with RJD leader Tejashwi Yadav also joined a high-profile march to the Chief Electoral's office in Patna, with other Mahagathbandhan allies on Wednesday. Amid growing tensiosn, opposition leaders warned that the current exercise risks silencing millions of legitimate voters in the run-up to the state assembly elections in November 2025.
What Is the SIR and Why Does It Matter?
The Special Intensive Revision is a large-scale drive to update and verify names on the electoral roll. Under constitutional provisions and the Representation of the People Act, the Election Commission (EC) is responsible for ensuring that only eligible citizens, aged 18 and above and ordinarily resident in the constituency, are included as voters.
(An ordinarily resident is someone who has resided in the state for over seven years preceding the current year.)
Unlike regular annual revisions, a SIR involves a thorough review of the voter list. This means each voter must re-submit their details, and in many cases, provide supporting documents to confirm their identity, age, and place of birth.
Why Has Bihar Been Chosen First?
According to the EC, Bihar was selected for the initial phase of the SIR due to rapid demographic changes over the past two decades. As per the Commission, migration, urban expansion, and shifts in population raised concerns about duplicate and inaccurate entries.
The last major revision of this scale in Bihar happened in 2003. Since then, millions of new voters have entered the rolls, and the Commission says an audit is necessary to maintain the integrity of the electoral system, especially with state polls due for later this year.
What Are the Key Concerns and Criticisms?
The Opposition, civil society groups, and voter rights advocates have flagged several red flags with the way the SIR is being conducted:
Documentation overload: Many voters are being asked to provide up to 11 different documents to stay on the rolls. For millions of rural, poor, or migrant voters, this is simply not feasible.
Exclusion of Aadhar: Despite being widely held, Aadhaar is not recognised as valid proof of citizenship or date of birth in the current guidelines. Critics say this leaves out the very people who rely on Aadhaar as their only form of ID.
Mixed messages from authorities: The state CEO initially suggested leniency, allowing voters to verify their credentials even without full documentation. But recent clarification from the Chief Election Commissioner insists on strict deadlines and document requirements, leaving voters and officials confused.
Discretionary verification: In the absence of documents, local officers are expected to verify identities through field investigation, raising concerns about inconsistency, human error, or even bias.
Opposition leaders have claimed that this is not merely a bureaucratic exercise but a calculated move to erase Dalits, Mahadalits, migrants, and poor voters from the rolls.
Additionally, 6 PILs have been filed by several political leaders, activists and organisations, including TMC leader Mahua Moitra and Association for Democratic Reforms (ADR), seeking a stay on EC's SIR of Bihar electoral roll.
What Could Be a More Inclusive Way Forward?
To safeguard the right to vote while maintaining accurate rolls, experts argued for a more balanced approach.
Firstly, the Election Commission should expand the list of acceptable documents to include widely held IDs like Aadhaar, ration cards, and MGNREGA job cards. These are accessible to large sections of the population and are already used in other welfare and civic processes.
Secondly, the process should provide extended timeframes and support for vulnerable groups, especially migrants and those with limited literacy or documentation. A blanket deadline without localised flexibility may end up excluding more people than it helps.
Lastly, the Commission must ensure transparency and accountability in on-ground verification, with oversight mechanisms to prevent arbitrary deletions.
As the Supreme Court prepares to hear petitions challenging the ongoing SIR, and political disagreements continue to rise in Bihar, the exercise has become more than an administrative task, it is now a litmus test for the future of democratic participation in one of India’s most electorally significant states.
