On December 2, 2025, the Election Commission of India (ECI) and the nation’s political leadership found themselves at the center of a stormy debate over the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls, a process that has drawn both sharp criticism and staunch defense. The controversy, which has played out in the halls of Parliament and the Supreme Court, reflects deeper anxieties about voter inclusion, political maneuvering, and the future of Indian democracy as the country gears up for a fresh cycle of state elections.
At the heart of the dispute lies the SIR exercise, a comprehensive review of electoral rolls underway in twelve states and union territories, including Bihar, Tamil Nadu, and West Bengal. The ECI, in an affidavit to the Supreme Court, asserted that the SIR in Bihar had been a resounding success, challenging the credibility of critics who claimed the revision was rushed and risked disenfranchising large swathes of the population. According to the ECI, fears that the process would be marred by Bihar’s high illiteracy rates and widespread flooding were “completely misconceived, incorrect and erroneous.”
The ECI didn’t mince words, accusing petitioners of “relying upon false figures deliberately placed to mislead” the court. It said that data presented by critics regarding the possession of the eleven documents required for voter registration in Bihar was simply wrong. Instead, the ECI insisted, its Booth Level Officers (BLOs) and other officials had actively helped eligible citizens secure the necessary documents. The result, the ECI reported, was the successful inclusion of 7.42 crore electors—including a significant number of first-time voters—despite the removal of previous electors who had died, relocated, or were found enrolled at multiple places.
Notably, the ECI emphasized that no individual had filed an appeal alleging exclusion from the electoral rolls in Bihar, a fact the commission cited as evidence of public satisfaction with the SIR 2025 process. “The successful inclusion of 7.42 crore electors, including first time electors…despite the fact that large number of electors from the last electoral roll being found dead, permanently shifted, or enrolled at multiple places shows that the fears of the petitioners were completely unfounded and misconceived,” the ECI stated in its affidavit, as reported by The Indian Express.
Yet, the SIR has become a lightning rod for political controversy, especially in states where opposition parties wield significant influence. In Tamil Nadu and West Bengal, opposition leaders and activists have raised alarms about the potential for mass disenfranchisement, especially among minorities and marginalized communities. In West Bengal, a petition filed by TMC MP Dola Sen alleged that more than 45% of voters on the current electoral rolls did not match the 2002 list, suggesting widespread discrepancies and exclusions. The ECI, however, categorically denied this claim, calling it “incorrect.”
Further, the ECI responded to concerns about the targeting of minorities, particularly Muslims, and the adverse impact on women, by stating such apprehensions were “purely speculative, false, misconceived, erroneous” and “unsustainable.” The commission pointed to Article 325 of the Constitution, which prohibits exclusion from the electoral rolls on the basis of religion, and insisted, “A Muslim who is a citizen of India needs not entertain any fear about exclusion merely on account of his religion. They are subjected to the same principles of scrutiny under the SIR as any other non-minority.”
On the procedural side, the ECI clarified that the SIR process does not involve the police, countering fears of intimidation or harassment. Instead, the commission said, the Electoral Registration Officer (ERO) is empowered to verify citizenship status solely to ensure eligibility for the electoral roll. If the ERO has reasonable grounds to suspect an individual’s citizenship, a Home Ministry circular from August 8, 2017, requires the matter be reported to the relevant authority for further action on illegal migrants.
Meanwhile, the political temperature in New Delhi rose sharply as Prime Minister Narendra Modi addressed the media before the winter session of Parliament. Modi, fresh from his party’s victory in Bihar, accused opposition parties of using Parliament “as an extension of their state politics” and as a platform for venting frustration over electoral defeats. “They should consider that the country is not accepting the game they have been playing for the past 10 years. They should now change their strategy. I am willing to give them tips as to how they should perform,” Modi quipped, according to The Times of India.
Modi’s remarks were a direct shot at Congress, whose member Rahul Gandhi had led a yatra against the SIR in Bihar, as well as at regional parties like TMC, DMK, and SP—all of which are demanding a debate on the SIR process. With assembly elections looming in Bengal and Tamil Nadu in early 2026, and Uttar Pradesh and Kerala not far behind, the stakes are high for parties on both sides of the aisle. Modi suggested that opposition parties were “warming up” for these contests by staging disruptions in Parliament, rather than engaging in substantive policy debate. “Parliament should be a forum for discussing policies and not raising slogans,” he said, lamenting that repeated disruptions had prevented first-time MPs from making their mark.
Despite the heated rhetoric, Modi struck a note of optimism, expressing hope that the winter session would “energize efforts toward progress” rather than become “merely a ritual.” He pointed to the high voter turnout in Bihar and the country’s robust economic growth as proof that “democracy can deliver.” Yet, he also acknowledged the frustration of new MPs who had been unable to raise their issues due to frequent parliamentary standstills.
The opposition, for its part, remains united in its demand for a comprehensive debate on the SIR exercise, arguing that the process could have far-reaching implications for electoral integrity and the rights of vulnerable communities. Leaders from Congress, the Left, TMC, DMK, and SP have all signaled their intent to press the government on the issue, even at the risk of further parliamentary gridlock.
As the SIR exercise continues in West Bengal and other states, the ECI has sought to reassure anxious communities. Responding to concerns from the Matua community in Bengal, the commission stated there was “no reason for panic,” as the process was still in the enumeration phase and no final decisions had been made.
Ultimately, the battle over the SIR exercise is as much about the mechanics of democracy as it is about public trust. With the Supreme Court, Parliament, and the Election Commission all drawn into the fray, the coming months will test not only the resilience of India’s electoral system but also the willingness of its leaders to rise above partisan squabbles in defense of the franchise. For now, the only certainty is that every move will be scrutinized—and contested—by those with the most to gain, or lose, at the ballot box.
