Vote Bandi in Bihar? EC's Electoral Roll Purge Faces Heat in Supreme Court

The Election Commission of India (ECI) has always claimed to be the custodian of the democratic process. But its latest move—a Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls in Bihar—is now facing scrutiny in the Supreme Court, where civil society groups argue that the exercise could disenfranchise millions of genuine voters in the state.

The Association for Democratic Reforms (ADR), a well-known electoral reform advocacy group, has filed a petition challenging the ECI’s June 24 order, calling the process “arbitrary, exclusionary, and unconstitutional.” The plea—filed by advocate Prashant Bhushan—alleges that the ECI’s directive violates multiple constitutional provisions including Articles 14 (equality before law), 19 (freedom of expression), 21 (right to life), 325 and 326 (universal suffrage), as well as the Representation of the People Act, 1950 and associated rules.

At the heart of the controversy is the EC's insistence that any person whose name was not recorded in the 2003 electoral rolls must now submit one of 11 specific documents to prove their eligibility to vote. In a state like Bihar, where access to documentation is severely limited—particularly in rural and marginalized communities—this requirement is akin to a bureaucratic landmine.

The EC claims that the move is part of a broader effort to ensure “error-free electoral rolls,” citing concerns over the inclusion of illegal immigrants, frequent migration, underreporting of deaths, and the addition of young voters turning 18.

However, critics argue that the move comes just months before the Bihar Assembly elections, making the timing suspicious. More worryingly, the EC’s document list appears to ignore ground realities in Bihar:

• Government Service ID: According to the Bihar Caste Survey 2022, only 1.57% of the state’s population is employed in government jobs.

• Birth Certificate: Bihar had one of the worst birth registration rates in the country until very recently. In 2007, only 25% of births were officially registered. In 2000, the number was as low as 3.7%.

• Passport: Only 2% of Bihar’s population holds a valid passport.

• Matriculation Certificate: Just 14.71% of the population has passed Class 10, while dropout rates in Classes 6–8 stand at a worrying 26%.

• Forest Rights Certificate: Out of 4,696 claims under the Forest Rights Act in Bihar, only 191 were approved.

• Caste Certificates: No comprehensive data exists on how many OBC, SC, ST, or EBC individuals (who together make up nearly 85% of Bihar’s population) possess official caste certificates.

For millions of rural and marginalized citizens, producing any one of these documents on short notice is a herculean task. According to Paragraph 5B of the EC's guidelines, failure to produce documents could even flag a person as a “suspected foreign national.”

This raises a chilling possibility: Could a voter, born and raised in Bihar, be deemed an outsider in their own land?

Votebandi Echoes Notebandi: A Political Flashpoint

Social media users have dubbed the exercise “Votebandi”, drawing parallels to the disastrous Notebandi (demonetization) of 2016 and “Deshbandi” during COVID-19 lockdowns. And like those decisions, this too appears top-down, poorly timed, and blind to socio-economic inequity.

Political parties, especially those in the opposition INDIA bloc, have raised serious objections. Their demand? Make the process voter-friendly and inclusive. But the EC has largely ignored their appeals, stating only that the 11-document list is “indicative, not exhaustive.” That’s cold comfort to a population for whom just collecting an Aadhaar card or a school certificate can take weeks or months.

Prashant Bhushan, representing ADR, told the Court:

“The documentation requirements and lack of due process will arbitrarily disenfranchise lakhs of voters.

The ECI must act as a facilitator of democracy, not as a gatekeeper.”

He added that the timeline is unreasonably short, with house-to-house verifications being carried out by booth-level officers, many of whom lack adequate training and logistical support.

The last such revision happened in 2003. So why now? Why Bihar? Why under conditions so hard to meet?

The EC says it will adhere to Article 326 of the Constitution and Section 16 of the Representation of the People Act. But if that’s true, how can it justify pushing lakhs of voters to the brink of disenfranchisement with such opaque methods?

Electoral Roll Revisions or Electoral Roll Rigging?

In theory, the EC is merely “cleaning” the rolls. In practice, many see it as a politically motivated maneuver—one that may selectively disenfranchise certain sections of the population, especially the poor, the illiterate, and minorities.

Consider this: the EC wants to use the 2003 electoral roll as a reference point. But that was 22 years ago. Bihar has undergone dramatic changes since then—migration, urbanisation, a youth bulge, and a digital divide. Using such an outdated list risks ignoring millions of voters who were simply too young, too poor, or too invisible to be counted back then.

The EC’s use of the term “illegal immigrants” is particularly troubling. There is no credible evidence to suggest a large presence of such individuals in Bihar, unlike in border states like Assam. Introducing this narrative in an election year risks stoking communal tension and undermines the integrity of the democratic process.

Even more dangerous is the discretionary power granted to Electoral Registration Officers (EROs). While the EC says the list of documents is only indicative, the EROs are the final authority. In a highly politicised environment, this can lead to bias, intimidation, or arbitrary rejections—especially against the most vulnerable.

The right to vote is not just a constitutional guarantee—it is the soul of Indian democracy. When the state demands paperwork that the majority cannot provide, it effectively turns this right into a privilege.

The Supreme Court now has a historic responsibility—to remind the Election Commission that election integrity cannot come at the cost of citizen dignity.

If not rolled back or substantially altered, this "Vote bandi" could be remembered not as an exercise in electoral hygiene, but as a calculated act of disenfranchisement, echoing the exclusionary tactics we’ve seen elsewhere in the world.

In Bihar, a state already burdened by poverty, migration, and administrative apathy, the right to vote must not become a luxury only for the documented elite.

Because once you start purifying democracy, you might just poison it.