Context

• In recent years, India has witnessed a quiet but profound transformation in how citizenship, belonging, and democratic participation are defined.
• At the heart of this shift lies a growing preoccupation with documentation and verification, especially visible in the domain of electoral politics.
• Nowhere is this more apparent than in Bihar, where a Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls by the Election Commission of India (ECI) threatens to disenfranchise millions of eligible voters.
• This bureaucratic exercise, cloaked in the language of electoral integrity, risks undermining constitutional principles of equality, justice, and fraternity.

The Unsettling Nature of the ‘Routine’ and Its Impact

• The Unsettling Nature of the ‘Routine’
  • On paper, the SIR in Bihar appears to be a routine administrative update but in practice, however, it marks a dramatic departure from precedent.
  • Nearly 4.74 crore voters, approximately 60% of Bihar’s electorate, are now required to provide new documentation to prove their eligibility.
  • Unlike earlier processes where self-declaration was accepted as sufficient, voters must now present hard-to-obtain documents such as birth certificates, land deeds, or school-leaving certificates.
  • This new threshold ignores the ground realities in a state where access to such documentation is limited, especially in rural and marginalized communities.
  • The burden of proof is now squarely on the individual, despite the state’s historic failure to provide widespread, accessible civil documentation.
• Disproportionate Impact on Marginalised Communities
  • The implications of this overhaul are deeply uneven. Migrant workers, the poor, and Muslims, groups already marginalised, are likely to be disproportionately affected.
  • Migrants, who make up about 20% of Bihar's population, may be away from their homes during the 30-day verification period, coinciding with the monsoon season that floods much of the state.
  • Many of them lack the required documentation, despite possessing widely accepted government-issued IDs such as Aadhaar or MGNREGA cards, which are now being rejected.

The Debate on Legality vs. Legitimacy of the Revision

• The ECI justifies the revision as an effort to remove duplicate entries and include newly eligible voters, tasks well within its legal mandate.
• However, questions of legality must also contend with issues of practicality and fairness. The scale, speed, and method of the Bihar revision are highly problematic.
• There is neither enough time nor sufficient infrastructural support to carry out a verification process of this magnitude without compromising accuracy and inclusiveness.
• Moreover, the ECI’s decision to not accept its own voter ID cards as valid documents raises serious questions about institutional consistency and credibility.

Broader Implications of the Exercise

• A Democratic Encroachment
  • By engaging in what amounts to a citizenship verification drive, the ECI is encroaching upon responsibilities constitutionally vested in the judiciary and designated tribunals.
  • Electoral Registration Officers (EROs) may now refer individuals suspected of being foreigners to appropriate authorities, a power previously outside the Commission’s remit.
  • This shift is alarming not only because it violates established legal boundaries but also because it introduces a punitive, exclusionary logic into what should be an inclusive democratic process.
  • The Supreme Court has, in the past, warned against placing the burden of proof on individuals already listed on electoral rolls.
• National Implications and the Threat of Precedent
  • What is unfolding in Bihar may not remain confined to the state. ECI officials have indicated that similar revisions are being considered in Assam, Kerala, Tamil Nadu, Puducherry, and West Bengal.
  • If adopted widely, this document-heavy model of verification could be institutionalised across India.
  • This would represent a systemic shift in electoral policy, one that favours exclusion over inclusion and bureaucratic rigidity over democratic access.
  • Critics have rightly described the Bihar revision as a subtler form of gerrymandering. It does not redraw constituency lines but alters the demographic landscape by determining who gets to vote.
  • This threatens not just electoral fairness but the very fabric of Indian pluralism, particularly by casting suspicion on the loyalty of certain communities, most notably Muslims, whose political power is already under strain.

Conclusion

• The Bihar voter roll revision is currently under judicial scrutiny for violating fundamental rights such as the right to vote, equality before law, and human dignity.
• If allowed to proceed unchecked, it could disenfranchise lakhs, distort electoral outcomes, and severely damage public trust in democratic institutions.
• What is at stake is not merely the technical accuracy of electoral rolls but the foundational principle of inclusive democracy.