Institute of Legal and Management Studies

In the pleas challenging the Election Commission's special intensive revision (SIR) of Bihar's electoral rolls, political activist Yogendra Yadav produced before the Supreme Court today two persons who have allegedly been declared dead in the ECI's draft electoral rolls.

A bench of Justices Surya Kant and Joymalya Bagchi heard the matter and will continue the hearing tomorrow.

While Yadav's allegation was opposed by ECI counsel-Senior Advocate Rakesh Dwivedi, saying that instead of the "drama", Yadav could help the affected individuals in getting the rolls rectified, the bench said that there may have been an "inadvertent error", which could be rectified.

Besides the above allegation, Yadav raised many more submissions and gave facts and figures, which analysis was applauded by Justice Kant. These included:

♦ Mass exclusion of voters in Bihar

Recalling the bench's earlier assurance that it would step in if mass exclusion of voters takes place, Yadav alleged that mass exclusion has already begun. He claimed that the number of voters likely to be excluded is much more than 65 lakhs and may rise up to 1 crore if ECI continues with the SIR. It was alleged that the exclusion of voters in Bihar is not a failure of implementation of the SIR process, but rather its design. "Consequences will be same wherever SIR is undertaken", Yadav said.

Based on a census-based projection, he argued that the total adult population of Bihar is 8.18 crores and should not be taken as 7.9 crores. "This figure does not suffer from counting of deaths or migrated [individuals]...a good electoral roll of Bihar should have 8 crore 18 lakh people, but it had 7.9 crores. So there was deficit of 29 lakhs to begin with...any exercise should have covered that", Yadav said.

♦ Data on voter exclusion should take into account number of adult people eligible to vote

Yadav argued that completeness, accuracy and equity are three parameters on which any electoral roll can be tested. However, on all 3 counts, the SIR has failed and has been counter-productive. "I want to suggest that we should not begin by looking at 7.9 crores. We should see what is the percentage of adults eligible to vote", he said.

It was emphasized that India fares way better than some of the developed countries in terms of how many people make it to the voter list. Based on international statistics, it was contended that when the onus of enumeration of voters (that is, their making it to the voter list) is shifted from the state to citizens, atleast one quarter of total voters are likely to get ousted and most of these would be belonging to poor, marginalized and ethnic groups. Bihar, which stood at 97% voter eligibility, has come down to 88% already "with one stroke", Yadav claimed. "There would be further deletions now", he said.

♦ Current SIR exercise different from 2003 Intensive Revision

On a specific query, Yadav submitted that in 2003, ECI did not conduct a special intensive revision in Bihar. Rather, it was an intensive revision exercise, which is markedly different from the present exercise. "Never in the history of this country has any revision ever asked all people to submit a form or to submit a document. NEVER", he exclaimed. Explaining the situation in 2003, Yadav said that the electoral rolls at the time were sought to be computerized and as such, electoral officers were given printouts and asked to go door-to-door. No form or document was asked for, he said.

While he acknowledged that intensive revision is a good exercise, Yadav assailed the 'SIR' for its two distinct components - requirement of enumeration form and presumption of non-citizenship. "These are unique, unprecedented and, in the eyes of my learned friend, illegal", he asserted. He further called on the ECI to supply a copy of the 2003 order of intensive revision, saying it is not available in public domain.

Yadav further countered ECI's stance that about 4.6 crore voters were already there in 2003 electoral rolls and therefore don't have to submit documents. "The number is approx. 2.5 crores", he said.

♦ Bihar SIR an exercise of mass deletion, with zero addition

Yadav vehemently argued that the Bihar SIR is the first exercise in the history of India where revision of electoral rolls has taken place with zero additions. "Every single revision has involved some addition", he said. In this regard, Justice Kant observed that a revision can be intended at removing bogus voters. Yadav however questioned why the ECI has not found even a single person who ought to be added in the rolls. "It's extraordinary. This exercise was for intensive deletion, not revision. They say we can fill Form 6. But when they went to houses, they only looked for deletions...What happened to genuine additions?", he questioned.

Yadav also stated that there is evidence to show that women's names have been deleted in larger numbers compared to men, indicating an anti-women bias. "25 lakh men and 31 lakh women have been deleted", he said, while pointing out that if migration and deaths are reasons behind deletion of names, more number of men should have been deleted, as women rarely tend to migrate out of state alone and death rate is not higher among women. "We are witnessing perhaps the largest exercise of disenfranchisement, not in India, in the history of the world. Entire figure will cross 1 crore, if they are serious about what they are doing. We will break record of US in 19th century. This is a tectonic shift in universal adult franchise, because the onus has been shifted from state to the individual", he warned.

♦ BLOs' 'non-recommendation' of voters

Similar to Advocate Prashant Bhushan (appearing for ADR), Yadav assailed the booth-level officers' prerogative to 'not recommend' names of voters who duly filed their enumeration forms (which amounts to 'recommended for deletion' by BLO). He said that out of 7.24 crore voters, how many were 'not recommended' across Bihar is not known. But in case of two districts, he said that the figures stand at 10.6% and 12.6%. Yadav questioned the basis on which people were 'not recommended' by BLOs and why ECI was not sharing the data with the Court.

♦ ECI changes orders through press releases

Countering ECI's submission that people whose parents were part of the 2003 electoral rolls do not have to submit any certificate, Yadav said that the SIR order originally said that if a person is not in the 2003 rolls, he has to give his own and his parents' certificates. Then, a press release came which said that if one's parents were part of the 2003 rolls, the parents' certificates are not required and the person may only give his certificate. "Now, we hear a third thing - that you don't have to give your own certificate. I'm surprised. This is not what the order said. I have never heard of legal orders being changed through press release. So many changes have been made to this order. Atleast RBI has the courtesy to actually amend their orders, everytime they change. But ECI changes its legal orders through press release!", Yadav alleged.

♦ Adherence to ECI timeline wishful thinking; right to appeal not effectively available

Pointing to ECI's own data, Yadav said that while a total of 7.24 crore forms are to be scrutinized, ECI has set a limit of 3000 forms for every AERO. Rest is to be done by ERO. Based on his computation, every ERO would have to scrutinize 4678 forms every single day for the next few months to meet ECI deadline. Besides that, the ERO will also do enquiries of doubtful cases (approx. 800 every day) and handle flood crisis (in his capacity as BDO).

Insofar as ECI has been assuring that a person has rights to first and second appeal in case of deletion of name from draft roll, Yadav said that if last time's pattern is followed, on 30.09.2025, the electoral rolls will be frozen. He questioned - if on 25.09.2025, ECI tells a person wanting to contest that his name (though in draft list) has been deleted from the final list, what can such a person do?

In this context, it was contended that by the time the person would file an appeal, the electoral rolls would be frozen, determining his fate for the next 5 years. "This is the best way to throw any competitor out of elections. So it's not just about voters. Person who is not voter in Bihar cannot contest, this is dreadful", Yadav said.

Case Title: ASSOCIATION FOR DEMOCRATIC REFORMS AND ORS. Versus ELECTION COMMISSION OF INDIA, W.P.(C) No. 640/2025 (and connected cases)

Click Here To Read/Download Order