New Delhi, August 12, 2025 – The Supreme Court of India today took up petitions challenging the Election Commission of India's (ECI) Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of voter lists in Bihar, which has triggered a major controversy over the alleged deletion of over 65 lakh voters from the electoral rolls. The issue has sparked protests from opposition parties, who claim the process is a deliberate attempt to manipulate the upcoming Bihar assembly elections.
The SIR, launched by the ECI on June 24, 2025, aimed to clean up Bihar’s voter list following a summary revision earlier this year. The draft electoral roll, published on August 1, reported 7.24 crore voters but excluded roughly 65 lakh names, raising accusations of mass disenfranchisement, particularly among marginalized communities. Petitions filed by the Association for Democratic Reforms (ADR), political analyst Yogendra Yadav, and senior advocates Abhishek Manu Singhvi and Prashant Bhushan argued that the ECI lacks the authority to determine citizenship and has placed undue burdens on voters to prove their eligibility. They cited irregularities, such as 12 voters wrongly marked as deceased (including one woman later found alive) and the removal of search functions for the draft list after August 4, which hindered transparency.
In a hearing before Justices Surya Kant and Joymalya Bagchi, the court expressed concern over a “trust deficiency” in the ECI’s process, emphasizing that the SIR should prioritize inclusion over exclusion. Justice Kant questioned the feasibility of the rapid revision timeline, given Bihar’s challenges like floods and illiteracy, and suggested accepting documents like Aadhaar or Electors Photo Identity Cards (EPIC) for verification. However, the bench agreed with the ECI that these documents do not prove citizenship and dismissed concerns about obtaining alternative documents like birth certificates. The court urged affected voters to come forward and assured accountability for the ECI.
The ECI defended the SIR, asserting that no eligible voter would be removed without prior notice and an opportunity to be heard. It described the draft roll as a work-in-progress and clarified that it is not obligated to disclose details of omitted voters, categorized as deceased, duplicated, migrated, or untraceable. The commission also stated that approximately 6.5 crore electors from the 2003 roll and their children are exempt from additional documentation requirements, dismissing claims of widespread exclusion as speculative.
Outside the court, opposition leaders from the INDIA bloc escalated their protests. On August 11, prominent figures including Rahul Gandhi, Mallikarjun Kharge, Akhilesh Yadav, and Tejashwi Yadav marched to the ECI headquarters in Delhi, wearing caps labeled “SIR” and “vote chori” (vote theft). Nearly 300 opposition members were detained during the demonstration. Rahul Gandhi, in a post on X, called the issue a fight to protect democracy and demanded a transparent voter list. Tejashwi Yadav threatened an election boycott, labeling the SIR as manipulative. Opposition MPs also wore “124 Not Out” T-shirts in Parliament, mocking the inclusion of a 124-year-old first-time voter in the rolls to highlight alleged irregularities.
BJP leader Dharmendra Pradhan countered, accusing the opposition of spreading misinformation and undermining constitutional processes. Meanwhile, social media platforms like X have amplified the debate, with users sharing videos and posts, including Defense Minister Rajnath Singh challenging Rahul Gandhi to provide evidence of rigging. Others noted the ECI’s refusal to accept Aadhaar, voter IDs, or ration cards for SIR verification, further fueling public discontent.
The controversy has spotlighted longstanding issues in Bihar’s voter rolls, including erroneous photos, deceased voters still listed, and an estimated 35 lakh untraceable voters. As the state prepares for elections, the SIR debate raises critical questions about electoral integrity. The Supreme Court has not yet issued a final ruling, but the matter is set to continue, with calls for greater transparency to restore trust in the democratic process.
