Supreme Court seeks ECI’s response to plea seeking individual reasons for deleting 65 lakh voters from Bihar draft electoral roll

The application said the reason for removing each name is not individually shown, either constituency-wise or booth-wise, in the draft roll

The Supreme Court on Wednesday (August 6, 2025) asked the Election Commission of India (ECI) to give a detailed response to an application seeking the particulars and reason for each of the 65 lakh voters deleted from the Bihar draft electoral roll.

The draft roll was published on August 1 as part of the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) in the poll-bound State.

Editorial | ​A crisis of trust: On the Election Commission of India

A Bench headed by Justice Surya Kant told the poll body to file the particulars by August 9. A hearing has already been scheduled on August 12. The application was orally mentioned by advocates Prashant Bhushan and Neha Rathi for urgent hearing.

The application said the reasons for deletion of the voters were various, including deaths, permanent shifting out of the State, duplication of names and untraceability, etc. However, the reason for removing each name is not individually shown, either constituency-wise or booth-wise, in the draft roll.

“Direct the publication of a full and final Assembly constituency and part/booth wise list of names and details of approximately 65 lakh electors whose enumeration forms were not submitted along with reasons for non-submission (death, permanently shifted, duplication, untraceable, etc) against each name,” the application sought.

The applicants have also asked for the publication of an Assembly constituency and part/booth-wise list of electors on the draft electoral rolls whose enumeration forms have been marked ‘not recommended by the BLOs (Booth Level Officers)‘.

Related Stories

• Bihar leaders find SIR draft rolls ‘difficult’ to compare

• SIR very big issue, government must agree to debate: Priyanka Gandhi

• ECI’s SIR exercise is ‘an insult to migrant workers and gross interference in right of electorate in Tamil Nadu’: Chidambaram

“Information obtained for two districts, namely Darbhanga and Kaimur, show the marking ‘not recommended by BLO’ against a large percentage of electors whose enumeration forms have been uploaded. In Darbhanga and Kaimur, 10.6% and 12.6% of electors, respectively, have been marked ‘not recommended by BLO’,” Mr. Bhushan submitted.

He said the ECI had the required information, as was evident from a press release issued by it on July 25. This release had provided details of the 65 lakh voters. The press release had cited local BLO and booth-level agents (BLAs) reports naming 22 lakh deceased electors, seven lakh electors who had duplicate registrations, and 35 lakh voters who had either permanently migrated or could not be traced. Adding to this, the local officials had reported that 1.2 lakh electors had not yet submitted their enumeration forms.

The application submitted that post the publication of the draft roll on August 1, the ECI had also provided a list of the 65 Lakh electors whose names were deleted to the BLAs of a “few” political parties.

“The list with names of 65 lakh deleted electors curiously fails to disclose the reason for the non-submission of their enumeration forms, an information that the Election Commission evidently possesses. In other words, it fails to provide any explanation as to why these names were not included in the draft electoral rolls whether for reason of having been deceased, permanently migrated out of Bihar, being untraceable or on the ground of duplicate entry.” Mr. Bhushan argued.

He argued that even the list of deleted names provided to a few political parties has served no purpose as they cannot be used to cross-check any details from the ground in the absence of the reasons for such deletions.

“The ECI’s concealment of reason for deletion against each name in the list of 65 lakh electors seems to be an attempt to obviate the public, including the petitioners from ascertaining whether or not electors whose names figure in the list, are indeed dead or permanently migrated. It is to be noted that as per the Election Commission, those whose names do not figure in the draft roll stand do not enjoy the right to routine legal remedies (notice, personal hearing and appeals) available under Section 21A of the Registration of Voters Rules They do not have the option of participating in the process of claims and objections and thus are at the biggest risk of disenfranchisement,” the application said.