Anand Raj
Article 19 (Clause 1) of the Indian Constitution grants the freedom of movement of its citizens throughout the territory of India, including for work. Due to unequal development, people migrate to other states for work. People from eastern Indian states such as Bengal, Bihar, Jharkhand, and Odisha migrate to comparatively economically developed western and southern states in significant numbers. The case of Bihar is unique. Bihar is India’s lowest and most underdeveloped state in terms of multi-dimensional poverty, per-capita income, industrial development, and literacy, which leads to a high influx of migration (palayan) in other states, particularly for work. In Bihar, the nature of labour migration from lower strata of society is not a choice but a compulsion for survival. If survival is at the forefront, then in general, their democratic rights become the analytical question to discuss, particularly the current ongoing Special Intensive Revision (SIR).
SIR and Bihar Electoral Roll
On 24th June 2025, the ECI notified a Special Intensive Revision in Bihar, which ECI claims to be a focused exercise for eligible voters. ECI claims that under Article 324 of the Indian Constitution and Section 21 of the Representation of the People Act, 1950, SIR in Bihar was started. However, a petition by Yogendra Yadav and others in the SC claimed that the whole act of SIR is unconstitutional. They argued that ECI of India violated the RPA, 1950, and Rule 21A, which the SC has yet to hear.
The timing and duration of the conducting SIR during the monsoon, when Bihar suffers from the wrath of floods, raises the question of ECI preparation. Expecting to include every eligible voter in the new electoral roll in a very short period in the monsoon season is a utopian idea. In this way, SIR put the onus on individuals, irrespective of their social privileges and marginalisation, to prove their democratic right to vote.
Given the socio-economic precarity of migrants, it is challenging to return home to be on the electoral roll within a limited time. The SIR notification was so abrupt that it sparked widespread public anxiety, particularly because the last 2003 intensive revision is absent from collective memory. People have started calling it ‘votebandi (disenfranchisement),’ comparing it to ‘notebandi (demonetisation),’ fearing exclusion.
Credibility of the ECI Under Question
The decision of ECI to conduct SIR in Bihar raised fundamental questions on the very structure of the Indian democracy and constitutional rights for citizens, such as: Was it important to conduct SIR in Bihar if an election is due in the same year? Why has only a month been given to conduct SIR? Why is the Aadhar card, which is widely available among people, not considered in the list of eleven required documents? Why has ECI chosen the rainy season when the whole of Bihar suffers from floods? All the questions raised the question of the credibility of ECI and institutional biases, on which ECI must think about its autonomy, granted by the constitution.
On August 1, 2025, ECI publishes the voter list of 7.24 crore voters but cuts the names of 65 lakh voters by claiming them dead, migrated, duplicate, or untraceable. The deletion of 32 lakhs voters by claiming them migrants and 22 lakhs as dead is questionable. According to a ground report by a newspaper, The Hindu, significant anomalies have been found, like several migrant voters are claimed to be dead and have been deleted from the published voter list. The narrative from the ground and reporting of journalists like Ajit Anjum have claimed various cases of discrimination and mismanagement of identity proofs while collecting, filling, and uploading documents by booth-level officers (BLOs).
The current SIR in Bihar has the potential to exclude migrant workers, particularly those who are Dalits, Bahujan, Muslims, or women. When the informal nature of work and social identity, such as Dalits, Muslims, or women, intersect, then their chance to be invisible increases in the democratic process.
Supreme Court on SIR Petition
On 14th August 2025, in the hearing on SIR, petitions filed by political scientist and activist, Yogendra Yadav, and others, the Supreme Court (SC) of India gave an interim order, directing the ECI to publish an enumerated 65 lakh electors who are not included in the published voter list. A Bench of Justice Surya Kant and Joymalya Bagchi ordered the ECI that excluded 65 lakhs should be published with the individual reasons- death, migration, duplicity, and untraceability. SC taught ECI that “people have a right to know. A high degree of transparency is required to inspire voters’ confidence”, which preserves voters’ constitutional right in the electoral democracy. The hearing of the petition and interim orders on SIR shows its interest and guardianship of democracy.
SC further emphasises by giving a particular example in the context of migrant workers, “For a migrant worker who has been declared dead, even if he is illiterate, his neighbours or friends would alert him”. In the hearing, SC clearly recognised the issue of labour migration, SIR, and their democratic rights.
SIR, ECI and Way Forward
The ECI notification says, ‘no eligible citizen is left out while no ineligible person is included in the Electoral Roll’. The limited timeframe, lack of awareness, arbitrary management, misinformation, hatred, and weak infrastructure risk disenfranchising lakhs of marginalised people, including migrants and denying them their democratic rights. For ECI, it is a challenging task to conduct SIR while maintaining its institutional credibility in Bihar without leaving ‘eligible citizens’ on Bhagwan Bharose (God’s mercy). Thus, ECI should closely monitor the situation at the grassroots and be responsible for the raised questions so that elected representatives represent people, and not an oligarchy.
~~~
Anand Raj is a Doctoral Scholar at the Department of Liberal Arts, IIT Hyderabad.
