Electoral Roll Revision Controversy in India 2025

Recent developments have seen the Election Commission of India (ECI) undertake a Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls in 12 States and Union Territories where elections are imminent. This move has triggered protests and legal challenges from several State governments. The SIR was earlier conducted in Bihar before its Assembly election, raising questions about the timing and legality of such an extensive exercise shortly before polls.

Context of the Special Intensive Revision

The ECI initiated the SIR to update electoral rolls reflecting demographic changes like urbanisation, migration, and deaths since the last comprehensive revision in 2002-03. The exercise involves detailed enumeration, verification of voter details, and resolving claims and objections. However, the timing—close to upcoming elections—has drawn criticism, with opponents arguing it could affect voter rights and election fairness.

Legal Framework for Electoral Roll Revision

The Representation of the People Act, 1950, governs electoral roll revisions. Section 21 mandates a summary revision before general elections and permits other revisions as directed by the ECI. Intensive revisions like the SIR are comprehensive and time-consuming, akin to preparing a new roll. Typically, such revisions are expected in non-election years to avoid electoral disruption. Conducting an SIR just months before elections is not explicitly provided for in the law.

Citizenship Verification and Document Requirements

Only Indian citizens can vote under Article 326 of the Constitution. The SIR raised issues over documents required to prove citizenship. The ECI initially excluded Aadhaar as proof, a stance later modified by the Supreme Court directing Aadhaar’s acceptance for identity verification. However, citizenship is legally defined and regulated by the Ministry of Home Affairs, not the ECI. The ECI’s role is to verify documents notified by the government, but no comprehensive list has been issued, creating a grey area and leading the ECI to set its own document standards.

Constitutional and Judicial Considerations

The Supreme Court has emphasised that electoral roll removals must follow fair procedures under Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution, protecting against arbitrary exclusion. The 1995 Lal Babu Hussein case telld the presumption of valid enrolment unless proper procedure is violated. The lack of clarity on document standards and the timing of the SIR have led to legal disputes and interim court orders safeguarding voter rights.

Implications for Electoral Integrity

The SIR marks tensions between updating electoral rolls accurately and ensuring electoral fairness. Intensive revisions close to elections risk disenfranchising voters due to procedural delays or documentation issues. The absence of clear guidelines on citizenship proof complicates the ECI’s task. Coordination between the ECI and Ministry of Home Affairs remains critical for transparent and lawful electoral roll management.

Questions for UPSC:

1. Discuss the constitutional provisions and legal framework governing electoral roll revision in India. How do they balance electoral integrity and voter rights?
2. Critically examine the role of the Election Commission of India in verifying voter citizenship. How should its powers be delineated in relation to the Ministry of Home Affairs?
3. Explain the significance of Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India in protecting voter rights during electoral roll revisions. With suitable examples, discuss their application.
4. Comment on the challenges of conducting comprehensive electoral roll revision exercises close to elections. How can these challenges impact democratic processes and what measures can mitigate them?

Answer Hints:

1. Discuss the constitutional provisions and legal framework governing electoral roll revision in India. How do they balance electoral integrity and voter rights?

1. Article 326 of the Constitution mandates that only Indian citizens can vote, linking citizenship to electoral rolls.
2. Representation of the People Act, 1950 (Section 21) governs electoral roll revisions, mandating summary revision before general elections and allowing intensive revisions as directed by ECI.
3. Summary revisions are brief updates before elections; intensive revisions are comprehensive, akin to preparing a new roll.
4. Electoral integrity is maintained by ensuring rolls reflect current demographics, preventing bogus or duplicate entries.
5. Voter rights are protected by procedural safeguards, claims and objections processes, and judicial oversight against arbitrary removals.
6. The legal framework balances accuracy of rolls with timely, fair inclusion of eligible voters to uphold democratic legitimacy.

2. Critically examine the role of the Election Commission of India in verifying voter citizenship. How should its powers be delineated in relation to the Ministry of Home Affairs?

1. ECI has exclusive authority to prepare and revise electoral rolls, including verifying voter identity and citizenship documents.
2. Citizenship law and document specification fall under the Ministry of Home Affairs and relevant legislation (Citizenship Act, 1955).
3. ECI cannot legally define which documents prove citizenship; it must accept documents notified by the Home Ministry.
4. In absence of a notified document list, ECI has unilaterally prescribed documents, leading to legal and constitutional challenges.
5. Supreme Court interim orders have directed ECI to accept Aadhaar as identity proof, though not proof of citizenship.
6. Clear delineation requires coordination – Home Ministry specifies citizenship documents; ECI verifies and implements electoral rolls accordingly.

3. Explain the significance of Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India in protecting voter rights during electoral roll revisions. With suitable examples, discuss their application.

1. Article 14 guarantees equality before law and forbids arbitrary or discriminatory state action.
2. Article 21 ensures protection of life and personal liberty, including the right to vote, through fair and just procedures.
3. Electoral roll removals or exclusions must follow due process, with opportunity for claims, objections, and appeals.
4. Example – Supreme Court in Lal Babu Hussein case held that once enrolled, a voter’s name cannot be removed arbitrarily without following legal procedure.
5. Interim court orders during SIR have protected voters against wrongful disenfranchisement due to document issues.
6. These Articles ensure that electoral roll revisions do not violate fundamental rights or undermine democratic participation.

4. Comment on the challenges of conducting comprehensive electoral roll revision exercises close to elections. How can these challenges impact democratic processes and what measures can mitigate them?

1. Intensive revisions are time-consuming, requiring door-to-door enumeration, verification, and resolution of claims and objections.
2. Conducting SIR close to elections risks incomplete or erroneous rolls, disenfranchisement, and administrative overload.
3. Opposition and stakeholders may allege political motives, eroding trust in electoral fairness.
4. Delays in finalizing rolls can lead to confusion among voters and candidates, impacting election outcomes.
5. Mitigation measures include scheduling intensive revisions in non-election years, better inter-agency coordination, and clear legal guidelines.
6. Use of technology, public awareness campaigns, and judicial oversight can enhance transparency and protect voter rights.