On August 6, 2025, the Supreme Court of India directed the Election Commission of India (ECI) to provide a comprehensive response regarding the deletion of nearly 65 lakh (6.5 million) names from the draft electoral rolls in Bihar. The deletions were part of a Special Intensive Revision (SIR) exercise ahead of the forthcoming Bihar Assembly elections. The court ordered the ECI to submit detailed, constituency-wise and booth-wise data explaining who was removed and on what grounds by August 9. The case will be further heard on August 12.

The bench, comprising Justices Surya Kant, Ujjal Bhuyan, and N. Kotiswar Singh, acted following a plea by the NGO Association for Democratic Reforms (ADR). Advocate Prashant Bhushan, representing ADR, argued that the ECI had neither published the names of the dropped voters nor shared detailed reasons for their deletions with the public or even all political parties.

According to ECI’s earlier press note issued on July 25, the roughly 65 lakh deletions were attributed to several causes: around 22 lakh voters were alleged deceased, 7 lakh were reportedly registered at multiple locations, and 35 lakh were either migrated or untraceable. However, the lack of transparent disclosure has raised fears of disenfranchisement and has been criticized as undermining democratic accountability.

Bhushan pointed out that over 75% of the electors did not submit any of the eleven prescribed documents for voter verification during SIR, and booth-level officers (BLOs) had the important but undeclared role of recommending or not recommending voter inclusion based on verification. He highlighted cases where names were included or excluded without BLO endorsement, further questioning the integrity of the process. He emphasized, “The present list of names dropped from the Draft Electoral Rolls provided to some political parties serves no purpose without reasons for deletion. ECI’s concealment seemingly precludes public and political stakeholders from ascertaining whether deletions are justified.”

Earlier, on July 28, during hearings concerning challenges to the SIR, the Supreme Court had cautioned the ECI to adopt a “mass inclusion, not mass exclusion” strategy for voter verification. The Court also questioned the restriction on accepting widely used identity proofs like Aadhaar and Electoral Photo Identity Cards.

The SIR exercise, which began in June 2025, is a critical mechanism designed to update and clean the electoral rolls ahead of Bihar’s elections later this year. However, this large-scale voter removal—approximately 8% of Bihar’s electorate—has sparked intense political and civil society concern, with allegations that the process could disenfranchise genuine voters, particularly those marginalized or lacking documentation.

The Supreme Court’s intervention highlights the need for transparency and due process in election roll revisions, emphasizing democratic principles and citizens’ rights to vote. Justice Surya Kant noted that according to ECI’s Standard Operating Procedure, political parties are entitled to receive the list of deleted voters at block levels; however, petitioners claim this information was either withheld or incomplete.

In conclusion, the Supreme Court’s directive to the Election Commission to provide detailed disclosure represents a pivotal step towards ensuring electoral transparency in Bihar’s upcoming polls. The Court’s insistence on clarity and accountability aims to protect voter rights, prevent arbitrary exclusions, and uphold the integrity of electoral democracy.

Observers and voters should monitor the Supreme Court hearings scheduled for August 12 closely, as the case’s outcome could set important precedents for electoral roll management nationwide. The ECI’s forthcoming reply and possible public disclosures will be crucial for restoring confidence in the electoral process and safeguarding enfranchisement in Bihar’s democratic exercise.