Context

India’s electoral system is undergoing a quiet but significant shift — one that redefines citizenship, belonging, and democratic participation through documentation and verification.
This transformation is most visible in Bihar, where a Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls by the Election Commission of India (ECI) is underway.

While framed as a routine update for electoral integrity, the exercise risks disenfranchising millions, especially from marginalized communities. Critics argue it threatens constitutional values of equality, justice, and fraternity.

Why the ‘Routine’ Revision Is Unsettling

• Mass Verification Drive: Nearly 4.74 crore voters (60% of Bihar’s electorate) are now required to furnish fresh documents to validate their eligibility.
• Raised Documentation Threshold: Unlike earlier processes based on self-declaration, voters must now produce hard-to-obtain documents like birth certificates, land records, or school-leaving certificates.
• Ground Reality Ignored: Bihar has poor civil documentation infrastructure, particularly in rural and marginalized areas, making compliance difficult.
• Shift in Burden: The responsibility of proving citizenship now falls entirely on the individual, even though the state failed to ensure accessible documentation systems.

Disproportionate Impact on Vulnerable Groups

• Migrant Workers (20% of Bihar’s population):
• Often absent during the 30-day verification window.
• Lack required documents despite having Aadhaar, MGNREGA, or Voter ID cards — many of which are now being rejected.
• Marginalized Communities:
• Poor, Dalits, and Muslims are likely to be the most affected.
• Raises fears of exclusionary targeting under the guise of procedural reform.

Legality vs. Legitimacy of the Revision

• Legal Justification by ECI:
• Claims the revision aims to remove duplicates and include new voters — tasks within its mandate under Section 21 of the RPA, 1950.
• Concerns Raised:
• Speed, scale, and method of execution are impractical and risk undermining accuracy and inclusion.
• Inconsistency: The voter ID (issued by the ECI itself) is not accepted as valid proof, raising questions of credibility.

Broader Democratic Concerns

A Shift Towards Citizenship Policing

• Expanded ECI Powers: Electoral officers are now empowered to refer individuals to foreigners’ tribunals, previously outside ECI’s scope.
• Judicial Encroachment: This blurs the line between electoral management and citizenship verification, a domain constitutionally assigned to courts and designated authorities.
• Supreme Court Caution: The Court has earlier warned against shifting the burden of proof onto registered voters.

National Precedent in the Making

• Similar voter roll revisions are reportedly planned in Assam, Kerala, Tamil Nadu, West Bengal, and Puducherry.
• If standardized, this document-intensive model could become the norm, transforming Indian electoral practice from inclusion to exclusion.

Critics’ View: Electoral Gerrymandering by Other Means

• This is not about redrawing constituency boundaries, but redrawing the voter base.
• Described as subtle gerrymandering, it risks altering demographic representation by excluding certain communities.
• Particularly impacts Muslims, whose political participation is already under pressure.

Conclusion

The Bihar electoral revision is currently being challenged in court on grounds of violating:

• The right to vote,
• Equality before the law, and
• Human dignity.

If left unchecked, this process could:

• Disenfranchise lakhs of voters,
• Distort electoral outcomes, and
• Severely erode trust in democratic institutions.

What’s truly at stake is not just the technical accuracy of the electoral rolls — but the core principle of inclusive democracy in India.