This inexplicable overnight explosion in a critical voter category, coupled with the overall increase in electors’ data marked for deletion from 35 lakh to 56 lakh in the same period (July 14 to July 23, 2025), unless the contrary proved.

A skyrocketing surge in just 24 hours

The initial phase of the SIR, as reported by the ECI on July 14, indicated that out of Bihar’s total 7,89,69,844 electors, enumeration forms from 6,60,67,208 individuals, or 83.66%, had been successfully collected. At that juncture, the ECI had identified specific categories for deletion, 1.59% of electors were found to be deceased, 2.2% had permanently shifted residence, and 0.73% were identified as having multiple entries. This initial accounting suggested that approximately 88.18% of the electorate was either verified or categorised for deletion based on these criteria.

The figures emerging from the SIR are indeed startling, particularly the overnight jump in “untraceable electors.”

However, subsequent data releases unveiled a concerning volatility. On July 22, the ECI reported 11,484 “untraceable electors.” In an astonishing and unexplained leap, this figure surged to a staggering 100,000 by July 23 – an astronomical increase of approximately 809% within a mere 24 hours. This sudden surge in a highly problematic category of voters has become a central point of contention, raising serious questions about the methodologies and consistency of data collection and classification during the SIR.

Furthermore, the overall number of electors marked for deletion also witnessed a significant escalation. On July 22, with voter coverage reportedly at 97.30%, the count of electors flagged for deletion stood at 52 lakh (5.2 million). Yet, by July 23, with coverage marginally increasing to 98.01%, this figure jumped to 56 lakh (5.6 million). This implies that an additional 3 lakh (300,000) voters were identified for deletion in just a single day.

The sheer magnitude and rapid rate of these proposed deletions, particularly in the final stages of the revision, are fuelling a suspicion that the SIR may extend beyond a routine clean-up, potentially impacting the democratic rights of a significant portion of Bihar’s electorate.

The ECI’s justification and the underlying concerns

The Election Commission of India (ECI) is currently undertaking a Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls in Bihar, its first in 22 years, which it defends as crucial for maintaining the “purity of elections.” This exercise aims to remove deceased voters, permanent migrants, and duplicate entries, with ECI data as of July 23 showing 56 lakh electors identified for deletion.

Questions of timing and documentary requirements

However, this SIR has ignited a firestorm of criticism from opposition parties and civil society groups, who allege it’s a politically motivated attempt to disenfranchise marginalised communities. Their concerns are multi-layered, beginning with the highly suspect timing of the SIR just months before the Bihar assembly elections, which critics argue should have been conducted well in advance to avoid any perception of impropriety.

ALARMING DISCREPANCIES

Two glaring red flags have emerged from the Special Intensive Revision of the voter list in Bihar:

On 22nd July, the number of untraceable electors stood at 11,484. By 23rd July, that number suddenly exploded to 1 LAKH
At 88.18% voter… pic.twitter.com/3icF2UkZZt

— All India Trinamool Congress (@AITCofficial) July 24, 2025

Furthermore, the methodology and documentary requirements have drawn fire; despite the ECI’s claim that Aadhaar, voter ID, and ration cards are not mandatory, their limited use for identity verification raises worries for poor and migrant workers who often lack readily available official documentation. This also shifts the burden of proof onto individual citizens, a challenging process for those with limited literacy or resources, issues currently being heard by the Supreme Court.

Opposition may boycott Bihar poll, says Tejashwi Yadav

In a stunning declaration Thursday, July 24, RJD leader, Tejaswi Yadav again alleged the Election Commission is for “working at the behest of BJP and ruling NDA” and might boycott the polls after taking feedback from people and alliance partners. Dramatically, he, the Leader of the Opposition in the Bihar Assembly, Tejashwi Yadav, has indicated that Opposition parties might boycott upcoming State Assembly elections in Bihar after taking feedback from people and our alliance partners, reports The Hindu.

“We will see what people want and what our allies say. If the state polls are conducted in a partial and manipulative manner where it is already decided who would win what number of seats, what is the use of conducting such an election? We may consider boycotting the upcoming state assembly elections in Bihar after taking feedback from people and our (alliance) partners”, Mr Yadav, who is from the Opposition Rashtriya Janata Dal, told a news agency on Wednesday (July 23, 2025).

Earlier in the day on July 23, there was a verbal duel between ruling NDA and Opposition mahagathbandhan (grand alliance) legislators on the third day of monsoon session of the Bihar Assembly over the issue of Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of the electoral roll in the State. Thereafter, while addressing media persons, Mr. Yadav alleged the Election Commission for “working at the behest of BJP and ruling NDA” and claimed that “the possibility of deletion of 50-80 lakh voters from the voter list is alarming”.

“If we have so many deletions from the voters list, it is clear that there would be 3,000-4,000 names of voters who would be struck off from the electoral roll on each booth of the state and this is the conspiracy of the NDA to get favourable results in the poll,” alleged Mr. Yadav.

“If they (NDA) want to win elections through fraudulent means, then what is the point in conducting elections? Chunav mat karwao (don’t hold the elections),” he quipped while speaking to the reporters.

“We’ll consult our (alliance) partners and people before taking a final decision on this (boycotting the poll),” he added.

The Indian National Congress (INC), an ally also came out in support of RJD on the issue. “Yes, we’ll seriously discuss the issue (of boycotting the poll)… we could join any form of protest. If voters are denied their franchise, what remains in a democratic set-up of the country?” asked senior state Congress leader and legislator party leader in the State Assembly, Shakeel Ahmad Khan.

The ruling party (JD-U) leader and party spokesperson Neeraj Kumar, however, slammed Mr. Yadav for the “poll boycott threat”. “His (poll) boycott threat shows sheer desperation and hopelessness. Has he (Mr Yadav) forgotten that the people of the state had limited his party (RJD) to just four seats in the last Lok Sabha elections in 2024?”, said Mr. Kumar.

The Opposition mahagathbandhan (grand alliance) leaders are expected to “take a final call on poll boycott in days to come”, the other leaders of mahagathbandhan told The Hindu over a phone call.

“Possibly, after the ongoing monsoon session of the state legislature, which is scheduled to be concluded tomorrow on July 25,” said one of the senior Left party leaders while seeking anonymity. The three Left Parties — the Communist Party of India (CPI), the Communist Party of India-Marxist (CPM) and the Communist Party of India-Marxists-Leninist (CPI-ML) — are part of the Opposition mahagathbandhan in the State.

The State Assembly elections in Bihar are due in October-November later this year.

Bihar’s SIR: Impractical deadlines and opaque deletions

The remarkably short deadline for form submission, July 25, 2025, is deemed impractical, especially for Bihar’s significant migrant population, with 15 lakh voters yet to submit forms, risking the exclusion of legitimate voters due to logistical hurdles or lack of awareness, despite online and WhatsApp options. Finally, deep concerns persist regarding the opacity of the deletion process itself. The sheer volume of proposed deletions and limited time for verification, even with lists shared with political party-nominated Booth Level Agents, raise serious doubts about the thoroughness and fairness of the process, fuelling fears of erroneous deletions that could disproportionately impact specific demographic groups.

ECI’s stance on voter IDs and citizenship verification in court

he ongoing Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of Bihar’s electoral rolls has been further complicated by the Election Commission of India’s (ECI) recent affidavit to the Supreme Court. Filed on July 21, 2025, the ECI, through Deputy Election Commissioner Sanjay Kumar, stated that Electoral Photo Identity Cards (EPICs/Voter IDs) cannot be considered primary documents for new entries, categorising the SIR as a “de novo revision process.” While acknowledging Aadhaar’s utility for identification, the ECI reiterated it’s not a standalone proof of eligibility or citizenship. Furthermore, the ECI defended its right to verify citizenship, citing its constitutional mandate under Article 326 and Sections 16 and 19 of the Representation of the People Act, 1950, to ensure only citizens are registered.

Divergence from Supreme Court’s concern and ground realities

This stance directly challenges the Supreme Court’s July 10, 2025, observation that EPICs, Aadhaar, and ration cards should be considered valid. The ECI justified excluding ration cards due to “widespread prevalence of fraudulent cards.”

This significant deletion rate, coupled with the ECI’s stringent documentary requirements and its assertion of citizenship verification powers, has fuelled concerns from opposition parties and civil society about potential widespread disenfranchisement, particularly of marginalised sections. Many reports have also reported ground-level procedural flaws. The next Supreme Court hearing on July 28, 2025, will be crucial in addressing these contentious issues.

Related

ECI to SC: Voter ID insufficient for Bihar roll, defends citizenship verification power

SC: ECI’s ‘wisdom’ on revision of electoral rolls challenged, does a disenfranchisement crisis loom over Bihar, with thousands being declared ‘‘D’ (doubtful) voters?

Bihar:  SC signals that ECI should consider Aadhaar, EPIC (Voter ID card) & Ration card for electoral roll revision 

The post Bihar’s untraceable electors spiral by 809% in just one day, ECI reports 1 lakh ‘missing’, 15 lakh Bihar voters yet to submit forms appeared first on SabrangIndia.

The Household Consumption Expenditure Survey (HCES) conducted by the National Sample Survey Office (NSSO), and designed to collect information on consumption and expenditure of households on goods and services, was released by the Ministry of Statistics & Programme Implementation (MoSPI) in June 2024. Drawing from this data, a report ‘Nutritional Intake in India’ was released in July 2025.

The HCES estimates the monthly per capita consumption expenditure (MPCE) from the total value of monthly consumption of goods and services of the household divided by the number of members of the household, and its distribution among households and individuals. It gives a break up of expenditure by commodity group at the national and state level. It has two sets of estimates – one without factoring in the value of items (grains, edible oil, pulses, laptops or personal computers, bicycles, uniforms, footwear etc) received free of cost through various social welfare programmes, and the other with the imputed values that includes these items. Pradhan Mantri Jan Arogya Yojana (PM-JAY) and education related information has not been imputed here because of the apparent complexity of measurement.

Proportion of expenditure on food in a household is considered as an indicator of poverty. A decline in food spending is generally understood as an increase in incomes, which then means having more money for other expenditures like on medical, clothing, education, conveyance, durables, fuel and entertainment, among other things.  Food as a share of total consumer expenditure is less than 10% in many economies. In India, it continues to remain high overall. In rural households, the share of food in total consumption expenditure varies from 40% (Kerala) to 53% (Assam) (mean 47%), and in the urban households from 36% (Maharashtra) to 49% (Bihar) (mean 40%).

Based on the HCES, the government, through the NITI Aayog and other bodies, has declared that less than 5% of Indians are now expected to be below the poverty line, that welfare, inequality and poverty have improved since 2011-12, and that the nutritional intake is seen to have generally improved. Going forward, if policies have to be evidence-based, then all of these assertions have to be revisited.

Nutritional Intake Data

The report—‘Nutritional Intake in India’, estimates per capita and per consumer unit consumption of calories, protein, and fat. This report has apparently been compiled to ensure that adequate nutrition can be ensured for citizens, particularly those who are economically vulnerable, to plan welfare schemes and to compute poverty related calculations, for national and international comparisons. It gives an idea of nutrient intake and its source. It therefore gives an idea of the energy, protein and fat consumption of each household which can then be extrapolated to individuals. To date, five reports on “Nutrition Intake in India’ have been published[1].

Key findings on nutrition

As can be seen in Table 1 and 2, there is a similar pattern in expenditure on consumption of various categories of food items, the highest proportion being spent on consumption of beverages and processed food (21% in rural areas and 28% in urban areas).These changes in the composition of household expenditure are attributed to changes in household demand and improved infrastructure, storage, and transportation, which have expanded the markets for perishable items such as fresh fruits, milk & milk products, eggs, fish, and meat, making them more accessible and affordable across all regions of India.

The recorded foods consumed by the household are converted into the equivalent amounts of energy, protein and fat based on a Nutrition Conversion Table prepared by a committee constituted by MoSPI. households.

The intakes as per the report are:

Average Calorie Intake:

• • • Rural: 2,212 kcal
    • Urban: 2,240 kcal

Protein (grams):

• • • Rural: 61.8
    • Urban: 63.4

Fat (grams):

• • • Rural: 60.4
    • Urban: 69.8

However, the actual intake of nutrients depends on how these foods are processed and/or cooked in the surveyed households.

For example, if a larger proportion of calories are derived from simple carbohydrates (all forms of sugar) or refined carbohydrates (grains, root vegetables and some pulses and legumes with the fibre and bran being removed) will quickly increase blood sugar levels. then it can lead to an increased risk of obesity and diabetes. Therefore calories from simple sugars and refined complex carbohydrates should be minimised or stopped. But merely computing the total number of calories without breaking them down into their source does not truly indicate the nutritive value of food consumed.

The urban and rural data for different states (Table 1 and 2), gives an idea of how different states facilitate different foods and dietary diversity. For instance, Kerala, West Bengal, Assam are among the top spenders on animal sources of protein while MP and Rajasthan are among the lowest. Similarly Haryana, MP, Rajasthan, Punjab are among the top spenders on milk and milk products while Kerala, West Bengal and Assam are among the lowest consumers of milk and milk products. These differences are related to geographical location, on what kinds of food is grown locally and is easily available.

For instance Kerala, West Bengal and Assam are close to large rivers and /or sea. Therefore fish consumption is very high. On the other hand, cattle and other livestock rearing is common in the Gangetic plains of North India. So Haryana, UP, Rajasthan and MP are among the top spenders for milk and milk products. Policy makers need to examine these data in the light of local contexts and should ensure that dietary diversity is at the heart of all welfare schemes related to food and nutrition such as the food and take home rations (THR) provided in anganwadis, public distribution system (PDS), mid-day meals and so on. Policy makers need to use these data to join the dots so that the schemes and programs are interconnected and comprehensive.

For example, consumption expenditure could be compared with data on the prevalence of anemia, stunting, underweight and other deficiencies. Such an exercise will contribute towards development of meaningful and effective programs that make use of local diversity in foods and also cater to the local tastes. Instead, the government chooses to take short cuts that benefit multi-national corporations such as universal fortification of rice with iron.

Energy/calories

The energy consumption of a man of average height and weight doing sedentary work is considered as one Consumption unit (CU) and equivalent to 2400 kcal. If the same man does moderate and heavy work, the CU would increase. Women and children are considered to have less CU than this average man. As per Table 3, the average daily per capita and per consumer unit intake of calorie protein and fat has not changed much between the previous survey (2022-23) and this (2023-24).

*Consumer unit is a unit used to measure the energy requirement of a group of persons of different sectors, gender and age-groups

The HCES assumes that animal products like milk, meat, fish and egg, and plant foods like pulses, oilseeds and nuts are all good sources of protein, but both these groups cannot be held at par. Plant based foods can be deficient in certain essential amino acids.

In the rural sector the share of cereals ranges between 34-55% in all major States across both periods except Kerala, where it is around 25-26%. In the urban sector the share of cereals is 24-25% in Kerala and 31-51% in all other major States.

Protein

With regard to proteins, the report claims that cereals continue to be the single largest source of protein for households with a share of about 46-47% for rural India and about 39% for urban India,  although their contribution to protein has come down and that from pulses, dairy and meat/fish/poultry going up.

As can be seen in Figures 2 and 3, most of the protein source are cheap quality from cereal, unlike the highly bioavailable animal source foods such as meat, milk and milk products, eggs, fish, poultry which contribute no more than 20% of the total intake in rural areas and 27% in urban areas. India, thus has a long way to go before it has access to the kind of proteins (and other nutrients) that enable the best possible heights and weights as also improvement of other nutritional indicators. Cereals are only a moderate source of protein as they contain about 10% protein. Rice contains less protein (7%) than wheat (approximately 10%) and other cereals. Leafy vegetables, fruits, roots, tubers are generally poor sources of protein as they contain less than 2% protein.

For instance, it is assumed in the report, that soya bean is the richest source of protein, however these proteins are incomplete, with poor bioavailability and being indigestible, requiring a lot of processing to improve digestibility. This processing can, however, contribute to denaturing of the proteins.

The other sources of proteins have poor bioavailability and calculations have to factor that in. It is also important to calculate intake in grams per kg body weight with due consideration for age, activity and physiological status.

Of the 20 amino acids that the body requires, it cannot synthesise 9 (essential) AA which must be consumed in the diet. The bioavailability (ability to utilise) is more from eggs, milk and meat. Proteins help to build and repair tissues. Usual recommended protein is 0.8 gm per kilogram body weight or 10-15% of total calories but some studies show that young children, adolescents, pregnant/lactating women and senior citizens may need more from 1.2 -1.7 gm/day. Even if you consume proteins from plant sources, at least 50% of total intake should come from animal sources (milk, dairy, eggs, meat, fish or chicken) or 50:50. If the ASF proportion drops (40 ASF: 60 PSF), chances of developing deficiencies are higher.

Fats

Fats are important for various functions of many organs. Fats can contribute around 25-50% of the calorie requirement depending on age, activity levels etc. The quality of fats need to be considered with trans fats available in ultra-processed foods being of particular concern.

Fat is an important component of diet and supports a number of functions in the body. Fat is a concentrated source of energy and per unit weight, it supplies more than twice the energy of either protein or carbohydrate. It also imparts palatability to a diet and retards the pace of emptying of the stomach. Presence of fat in the diet is important for the absorption of fat-soluble vitamins like Vitamin A and Carotene.

Packaged foods

It is recognised that access to healthy diets is challenging in low income settings, and when there is high food insecurity. Processed foods, cereals and sugars (as seen in commercially produced beverages) contribute both to under-nutrition but also to non-communicable diseases (NCDs) such as obesity, diabetes, hypertension, cardiovascular disease, cancer etc. It is therefore concerning that the report downplays this and instead makes it appear like protein from cereal has reduced while protein from other sources has gone up. Given the increased expenditure (above all other foods) towards beverages and processed foods, there would need to be more policy interventions to control this.

According to Kapoor et al. (2024), a 1 standard deviation increase from mean of diversity was associated with approximately 10% lower prevalence of anaemia in women (15-49 years). They found that the prevalence of anaemia among children (6 to 59 months) and women (15 to 49 years) is inversely associated with the dietary diversity of iron sources as measured by the Shannon Diversity Index. This relationship was observed across state/UTs and the NSS regions. They recommend that dietary diversity plays an important policy role in addressing anaemia – “an implication of this is that economic growth and development, which improve the dietary diversity of the household, could play an instrumental role in reducing the prevalence of anaemia among children and women.’ They conclude that although universal fortification in an attempt to improve iron intake and reduce anaemia in India, has widespread appeal yet it has limited impact. This echoes what doctors and several food rights groups have been saying – that fortification is not just useless, but downright harmful, and importantly that policies that promote dietary diversity at the household level, apart from general economic growth and improved access and affordability of diverse food items “through advancements in supply chain and logistics” as also “traditional practices and food habits at highly localized levels” would be better policy.

We need to also recognise that eggs are systematically denied from the mid-day meals in many states across the country. Cattle slaughter bans have made cheap nutrient dense foods inaccessible to many. So, on the one hand, the government claims to celebrate diversity while systematically erasing these, by enabling gory and macabre lynchings in the name of cow protection. The sources of micronutrients varies within states. For instance, Kerala with its acceptance of all animal source foods may have better levels of micronutrients as compared to states which are expected to make up their nutrient requirements from cereals. To meet requirements, they would have to consume increased quantities of cereals putting them at increased risk of non-communicable diseases. Children are further more likely to be stunted (and obese) if they do not have access to animal source foods. Unless these distinctions are made, a false narrative of all sources being equivalent will be created which is dangerous.

Concerns about the HCES, and some suggestions

This Household Consumption Expenditure Survey  (HCES) is different in methodology (including sampling) from the earlier Household Consumer Expenditure Survey (CES) last conducted in 2011-12, and therefore the two are not comparable – so the claim that India’s poverty has declined to below 5% doesn’t hold water. Secondly, the NITI Aayog has made no effort to even determine an official poverty line or re-examine the categories of urban or rural, last defined in the Census 2001. There are concerns that there is a higher representation of well-off groups in the current sample, giving higher consumption expenditure results and an active bias that excludes poor households. Imputed cost for items received free of cost through social welfare programs were not calculated earlier, so that can also artificially hike up the current MCPE estimates.

According to the National Accounts Statistics (NAC), household consumption share is dropping since 2016 with a drop in savings and rise in debt. Questions are being raised as to how it is possible for expenditures to rise when jobs are faltering, youth unemployment is doubling or tripling and the economy is slowing down.

The HCES survey for the year 2017-18, which revealed a decline in average per capita expenditure and increase in poverty headcount ratio, was conveniently junked by the government as “unreliable”. Before that, the survey was conducted in 2011–12. Hence, no consumer expenditure data was available for over a decade to assess the impact of the economic slowdown, demonetisation, the introduction of the Goods and Services Tax (GST), Covid-19 and lockdowns etc. and how many people above the poverty line have been pushed below.

The economist S. Subramanian argues that India’s abysmally low ranking on the  Global Hunger Index (GHI) which is drawn from under nutrition and <5 mortality indicators is not in keeping with what is being projected as a thriving economy.

The earlier sampling identified villages and urban blocks to select households to be surveyed. However the HCES strategy ensures that a certain proportion of the rural sample is from the villages close to the urban areas. As Anand (2024) writes –“It is safe to assume that villages closer to the city centre or the district headquarters would be relatively more affluent than the remote ones” also “While the survey design does not explicitly exclude the poorest from the sample, it reduces the probability of the poor making it to the sample”. If the extremely poor households are not a part of the sample, the monthly per capita expenditure estimates would be higher by design.  Standardization of HCES across countries and better understanding of the strengths and limitations of the data are also crucial.

In the context of the food consumption survey, there are several limitations to the HCES, most notably the difficulty of estimating the intra-household allocation of foods and therefore of quantifying the actual food intake of individual household members. Research is needed to better understand the strengths and the weaknesses of HCES data when used to assess and plan intakes at the household and individual levels Dietary surveys are widely used to assess food and nutrient intakes at the population or individual level. This helps to identify nutrient gaps as well as the risks of inadequate or excessive intakes to plan programs or policies. Several methods and tools exist to assess dietary intake, but the complexity and cost of dietary surveys often discourage their widespread use in developing countries, especially on an ongoing basis. Therefore, very few countries have reliable dietary data.  HCES, routinely conducted on a nationally representative sample, can be taken as proxy to plan nutrition related interventions. Whereas other methods can give individual level consumption patterns, HCES is limited to the household. Therefore, ideally, the HCES should be bolstered by other more accurate individual level data on food consumption. HCES therefore may not accurately capture individual consumption patterns due to factors like recall bias, differences in survey design across countries, and the challenges of tracking food consumed outside the home.

Standard measurements of individual consumption use the adult male as reference. For example, energy requirements of a non-pregnant or non-lactating woman is 0.8 and 0.6 for a child under five years of age. Using an estimate of the energy needs of a typical adult male (typically 3,000 kcal/day), the total household energy requirement can be estimated based on the number of Adult Male Equivalent units (AMEs) in the household. However, individual requirements can vary based on age, sex, physiological status, and (ideally) physical activity of each family member.

One method that could provide useful information is a comparison of nutritional data collected from the same household using multiple methods such as 24-hour recalls for each member of the household, as well as administering a standard HCES to determine household food consumption. Data at multiple time points to cover seasonal variations and other fluctuations in consumption would also be helpful. The more unwieldy assessments are done on smaller but representative samples.

HCES can also be difficult to compare across countries because of variations in period of recall, whether food has been collected for acquisition or consumption, mode of acquisition etc. Some of the procured foods listed in the HCES may be listed as fortified and this may or may not be factored into calculations. Further, additives, salt, sugar, trans fats etc. added to these may not be disclosed, and therefore difficult to measure or assess.

(The author is a public health doctor and researcher)

[1] Reports based on NSS (National Statistical Survey)’s 50th round (1993-94), 55th round (1999-2000), 61st round (2004-05), 66th round (2009-10) and 68th.

Related:

Poverty alleviation requires revision of Poverty Line

India behind on poverty, health and gender goals: Independent study

Why does the Karnataka government not want children to eat eggs at mid day meals?

Religious Indoctrination Through Midday Meals

Why health and sex education for young is crucial: Supreme Court

The post When data is used as a weapon against reality: Deviations in the HCES & CES, claims of poverty line appeared first on SabrangIndia.

Crucially, the ECI has also adamantly defended its authority to verify citizenship during this revision. While not claiming to adjudicate citizenship like the Central Government under the Citizenship Act, 1955, the ECI maintains its constitutional mandate under Article 326 and Sections 16 and 19 of the Representation of the People Act, 1950, to ensure that only Indian citizens are registered as voters. 

This stance directly addresses concerns raised during the Supreme Court’s July 10 hearing, where the bench had indicated that EPICs, along with Aadhaar and ration cards, should be considered valid documents. The onus, according to the ECI, remains on the individual to provide proof of citizenship for inclusion.

52, 30,126 electors (6.62%) were not found at their addresses so far, 18.66 lakh deceased says ECI

The hastily announced SIR—given that the state assembly elections are just a few months away have raised vocal opposition and concerns over the motive behind the process: whether mass exclusion of legitimate voters from the marginalised sections was underway, through this backdoor and unlawful method. Now the Commissions provisional figures lend strength to these accusations! The Election Commission’s provisional figures released yesterday, July 22, 2025, detailing Bihar’s Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls, have ignited a political firestorm, raising profound concerns about potential widespread disenfranchisement. The ECI reported receiving 7, 16, 04,102 enumeration forms, representing 90.67% of the total electors. 

However, the concerning revelation that “52, 30,126 electors (6.62%) were not found at their addresses so far” has become the central point of contention. This significant cohort comprises 18,66,869 reported deceased, 26,01,031 permanently shifted, and 7,50,742 enrolled at multiple places, alongside a smaller but concerning 11,484 untraceable individuals. Together, these account for about 6.62 per cent of the electorate. With the ECI’s motives under suspicion, its methodology faulty and opaque, and its attitude one of non-transparency laced with institutional arrogance, Bihar’s electorate is on edge.

The ECI’s press note dated 22.07.2025 can be read here

ECI’s rationale: preserving the integrity of revision

The ECI’s affidavit explicitly states, “The EPIC cards are prepared on the basis of electoral rolls. Since the electoral roll, itself, is being revised, the production of EPIC Cards will make the whole exercise futile. The conceptual and procedural integrity of a de-novo revision would stand undermined if EPICs, which are merely reflective of prior entries, are used to validate entries in a roll that is required to be constructed anew. The EPIC, being a by-product of an earlier electoral roll, cannot substitute the verification process mandated for fresh preparation and reliance solely on the EPIC for inclusion or automatic continuance would be contrary to both the scheme and purpose of a fresh revision exercise” as Live Law reported 

#BREAKING In the #Bihar SIR matter, Election Commission tells Supreme Court that the Electoral Photo Identity Card (EPIC) cannot be accepted for inclusion in the voter rolls, as this process is a fresh revision.

Since Voter ID cards are issued based on existing electoral rolls,… pic.twitter.com/Uk4Y4GPKgm

— Live Law (@LiveLawIndia) July 21, 2025

Regarding Aadhaar, the ECI reiterated its long-standing position: it is not recognised as a standalone valid document for electoral roll inclusion as it primarily serves as proof of identity and does not establish citizenship. The Commission cited Section 9 of the Aadhaar (Targeted Delivery of Financial and Other Subsidies, Benefits and Services) Act, 2016, which explicitly clarifies that possessing an Aadhaar number does not confer citizenship. 

However, the ECI did clarify that Aadhaar can “supplement other documents to prove eligibility,” acknowledging its utility for identification purposes during the SIR process, as evident from the enumeration forms allowing voluntary submission of Aadhaar numbers.

The exclusion of ration cards from the list of acceptable documents for the Bihar SIR was justified by the ECI on the grounds of widespread prevalence of fraudulent cards. The Commission referenced a central government press release from March 7, 2025, which reported the removal of 5 Crore fake ration cards. According to Live Law, the affidavit noted, “That it is submitted that given the widespread existence of fake ration cards, it has not been prescribed within a list of 11 documents to be relied upon for screening eligibility under Article 326”  

Despite this, the ECI emphasised that the list of documents in the Enumeration Forms is indicative, not exhaustive. Electoral Registration Officers (EROs) and Assistant EROs (AEROs) are obligated to consider all documents presented for proof of eligibility, including ration cards, with the final decision resting on the officer’s satisfaction as per Section 22 of the RP Act, 1950, and Rule 21(A) of the RER, 1960. The ECI clarified that these documents are primarily for “the limited purpose of establishing identity” during the SIR process.

ECI’s assertions on citizenship verification powers

A significant aspect of the ECI’s counter-affidavit is its determined defense of its authority to seek proof of citizenship during the SIR. This directly counters the petitioners’ argument that the ECI is overstepping its jurisdiction. The Commission asserted its statutory obligation to ensure only Indian citizens are registered as voters, deriving this power from Article 326 of the Constitution and Sections 16 and 19 of the Representation of the People Act, 1950.

Deputy Election Commissioner Sanjay Kumar’s affidavit stated, “ECI is vested with the power to scrutinize whether a proposed elector fulfils the criteria for being registered as a voter in the electoral roll, which includes, inter alia, an assessment of citizenship as per Article 326 of the COI. Such scrutiny is constitutionally mandated and crystallized by virtue of RP Act 1950. This power flows directly from the provisions of Article 324 read with 326 and Sections 16 and 19 of the RP Act 1950” Live Law reported 

The ECI dismissed the contention that the power to adjudicate citizenship rests solely with the central government. While acknowledging Section 9 of the Citizenship Act, 1955, which grants exclusive jurisdiction to the Central Government in cases of voluntary acquisition of foreign citizenship, the ECI argued that “Other aspects related to citizenship can be inquired into by other relevant authorities for their purposes, including those who are constitutionally obligated to do so, ie., the ECI.” The Commission highlighted that establishing citizenship is the individual’s responsibility, as the necessary documents are within their personal knowledge.

Crucially, the ECI clarified that it is not undertaking any independent exercise of determining or adjudicating upon the question of citizenship, but merely discharging its duty to prevent non-citizens from being included in the electoral roll. This, it argued, is distinct from the process under the Citizenship Act, 1955. 

The Commission also rejected the idea that requiring proof of citizenship reverses the burden of proof, stating that under the electoral registration scheme, an applicant must establish eligibility by submitting Form 6. For existing names, removal occurs only after a detailed inquiry and when the ERO is satisfied of the person’s ineligibility, without implying termination of citizenship.

The SC’s July 10 intervention 

These recent ECI submissions come in the wake of a mid-vacation hearing on July 10, 2025, where the Supreme Court, while declining to impose an interim stay on the Bihar SIR, made crucial observations. The bench, comprising Justices Sudhanshu Dhulia and Joymalya Bagchi, had unequivocally directed the ECI to “consider the following documents such as the Aadhaar card, the EPIC voter ID card issued by the Election Commission, and ration card.” 

The Court had also noted that the ECI’s existing list of 11 accepted documents was “not exhaustive.” This directive came amidst a batch of petitions, including those filed by the Association for Democratic Reforms (ADR), challenging the SIR process as arbitrary, discriminatory, and a potential threat to the fundamental right to vote, particularly by effectively acting as a citizenship screening mechanism. 

Petitioners, represented by legal stalwarts like Gopal Sankarnarayanan, Kapil Sibal, and Abhishek Manu Singhvi, had questioned the legality of the “Special Intensive Revision,” its unprecedented nature, the arbitrary distinctions made between voters (especially pre- and post-2003 registrants), and the immense burden of proof placed on individuals. Concerns were also raised about the short 30-day timeline and its proximity to the November 2025 Bihar Assembly elections, suggesting a political motive behind the exercise.

From about July 10, the Hindi daily, Dainik Bhaskar, as also independent journalist and You Tuber, Ajit Anjum have been flagging the issue of the problematic manner in which the SIR process is being carried out in Bihar.

Adding to the complexity and public scrutiny of the SIR process, senior journalist Ajit Anjum has faced legal repercussions for his investigative reporting. On July 13, 2025, a First Information Report (FIR) was registered against Anjum and his team in Balia, Begusarai, Bihar. The complaint, filed by a Booth Level Officer (BLO), alleged obstruction of government work and spreading communal animosity, citing sections of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, and the Representation of People’s Act, 1951. 

His video reports from the ground have meticulously detailed instances where ECI guidelines were allegedly circumvented, such as voters being denied acknowledgment receipts, BLOs receiving only single copies of forms, and incomplete forms being uploaded with only names and signatures, lacking photos or full details. Anjum’s persistent questioning of these procedural flaws, and his refusal to remove his videos despite alleged pressure from local authorities, has brought the ground-level challenges of the SIR into sharp focus. 

The road ahead: July 28 hearing and public scrutiny

The ECI’s detailed affidavit sets the stage for the next Supreme Court hearing on July 28, 2025. This hearing is expected to be crucial in determining the future direction of Bihar’s electoral roll revision. While the ECI asserts its constitutional and statutory mandate to conduct a thorough revision, including citizenship verification, and to set criteria for document acceptance, the Court’s previous observations indicate a strong emphasis on ensuring no eligible voter is disenfranchised. 

The challenge lies in balancing the ECI’s goal of “purity” in electoral rolls with the fundamental right to vote and avoiding processes that could disproportionately impact vulnerable populations. The ongoing legal battle, coupled with intense media and political scrutiny, underscores the significant implications of the Bihar SIR for democratic processes in India. The period from August 1 to September 1, 2025, earmarked for public objections to the Draft Electoral Rolls, will also be critical, as it provides a window for citizens to address any inaccuracies or exclusions.

Opposition parties staged protest outside the Parliament and Bihar Assembly

The release of these figures immediately galvanised opposition parties in Bihar. On July 22, 2025, dressed in black, opposition party legislators in the Bihar Assembly staged a protest for the second consecutive day against the ongoing SIR. The intensity of the protest escalated on July 23, 2025, leading to the adjournment of the Bihar Assembly until 2 p.m. after Chief Minister Nitish Kumar angrily intervened during a statement by Leader of the Opposition Tejashwi Yadav, plunging the House into turmoil.

#BREAKING In the #Bihar SIR matter, Election Commission tells Supreme Court that the Electoral Photo Identity Card (EPIC) cannot be accepted for inclusion in the voter rolls, as this process is a fresh revision.

Since Voter ID cards are issued based on existing electoral rolls,… pic.twitter.com/Uk4Y4GPKgm

— Live Law (@LiveLawIndia) July 21, 2025

Former CM Rabri Devi and other RJD MLCs mirrored this protest outside the Bihar Assembly. 

VIDEO | Patna: Former CM Rabri Devi (@RabriDeviRJD) and other RJD MLCs stage protest outside the Bihar Assembly over the issue of SIR.#BiharAssembly #BiharNews #BiharPolitics

(Full video available on PTI Videos – https://t.co/n147TvrpG7) pic.twitter.com/jv6RiKAbwy

— Press Trust of India (@PTI_News) July 23, 2025

Tejashwi Yadav, addressing the media, stated, “Today, we spoke on SIR in the Assembly…Who has been in power since 2005? Everyone knew what the discussion would be on, but the CM kept speaking on what he wanted. CM is not state to run the state now. The way state is being run from Delhi on remote control…” 

#WATCH | Patna | On Bihar SIR, RJD leader Tejashwi Yadav says, “Today, we spoke on SIR in the Assembly…Who has been in power since 2005?..Everyone knew what the discussion would be on, but the CM kept speaking on what he wanted. CM is not state to run the state now. The way… pic.twitter.com/hcfnlvhnuE

— ANI (@ANI) July 23, 2025

He further criticised the ECI’s “hasty” SIR, questioning, “Where will poor people get so many documents from?” Yadav also revealed, “The Speaker scolded the Deputy CM. Deputy CM Vijay Sinha made an inappropriate statement. Why are they allowed to speak in between?… The opposition will raise questions.”

The concerns over Bihar’s SIR have resonated across the national political landscape. Lok Sabha LoP and Congress MP Rahul Gandhi, commenting on the ECI flagging 52 lakh missing voters in Bihar, broadened the scope of the accusation: “It is not just about those 52 lakh people. They have done cheating in Maharashtra (Assembly elections). We asked the ECI to show the voter’s list, but they refused. We asked them to show videography, but they changed the rules of videography. 1 crore new voters were added in Maharashtra. In Karnataka, we have caught a huge theft. I will show it to the Election Commission in black and white on how theft is done. They have understood that we are aware of their game now… Now, what they are doing is that they have deleted the voters, and a new voter list will be brought…”

#WATCH | Delhi: On Election Commission flags 52 lakh missing voters in Bihar, Lok Sabha LoP and Congress MP Rahul Gandhi says, “It is not just about those 52 lakh people. They have done cheating in Maharashtra (Assembly elections). We asked the ECI to show the voter’s list, but… pic.twitter.com/a8sqIx35rW

— ANI (@ANI) July 23, 2025

The consolidated opposition front views the SIR exercise not merely as an administrative cleanup but as a deliberate attempt to manipulate electoral outcomes by targeting specific demographics for disenfranchisement

The sheer scale of these “untraced” electors, when combined with the ECI’s firm stance that Voter IDs are unacceptable for fresh enrollment and its assertive claim of citizenship verification powers, paints a troubling picture. This policy framework, particularly for a “de novo” revision, places an immense burden on genuine voters, especially migrant workers and those with limited access to extensive documentation. 

The larger narrative

The ECI’s position, particularly on Voter IDs and citizenship verification, stands in direct contrast to the Supreme Court’s observations during the July 10, 2025 hearing. In that earlier proceeding, the Court had urged the ECI to be more inclusive, specifically indicating that Aadhaar, EPICs, and ration cards should be considered valid identity documents for the SIR. The current ECI affidavit, filed in response to this, demonstrates a firm resolve to implement its own interpretation of the revision process. This creates a legal challenge that the July 28 hearing will likely address.

The concerns about potential disenfranchisement, particularly for marginalised communities, are not merely speculative. As highlighted by journalist Ajit Anjum’s recent reporting and subsequent FIR, the ground reality of the SIR has revealed significant procedural inconsistencies and challenges, like the denial of acknowledgement receipts and the burden on citizens to photocopy forms due to BLOs having limited supplies. 

These on-the-ground issues illustrate the practical difficulties electors face in complying with the ECI’s demands, amplifying the fear that the roughly 52.30 lakh “untraced” electors might face an uphill battle to prove their eligibility. The ECI’s defense of its citizenship verification powers, while legally framed, is seen by many as adding another layer of scrutiny that could disproportionately affect those whose citizenship documentation might be less straightforward or readily available. The ongoing legal battle and the ECI’s detailed data point to a significant democratic exercise with far-reaching implications for voter rights and the integrity of the electoral process in Bihar and, potentially, across the nation.

Related

Bihar:  SC signals that ECI should consider Aadhaar, EPIC (Voter ID card) & Ration card for electoral roll revision 

SC: ECI’s ‘wisdom’ on revision of electoral rolls challenged, does a disenfranchisement crisis loom over Bihar, with thousands being declared ‘‘D’ (doubtful) voters?

Bihar 2025 Election: EC drops parental birth document requirement for 4.96 crore electors and their children in Bihar

The post ECI to SC: Voter ID insufficient for Bihar roll, defends citizenship verification power appeared first on SabrangIndia.

Far from protecting the public, this Bill—if enacted—would allow the government to arrest, prosecute, and imprison users for social media posts deemed false, disrespectful, anti-feminist, or culturally inappropriate, without clear definitions, independent oversight, or constitutional safeguards.

A bill rooted in executive power, not due process nor public dialogue

The Bill’s legislative process betrays its undemocratic spirit. Though the Congress government had promised action against fake news in its 2023 manifesto, no draft was publicly released, no white paper issued, and no consultation held with journalists, civil society, or digital rights experts took place before the introduction of such a proposed law.

Instead, as reported by the Deccan Herald on June 20, 2025, details emerged through a leak, revealing shocking provisions: up to 7 years’ imprisonment, ₹10 lakh fines, non-bailable offences, and a new Authority chaired by the Information Minister to regulate speech on social media (Deccan Herald, 20 June 2025). The News Minute corroborated that the draft criminalises “anti-feminist” content and “disrespect of Sanatan symbols”.

This clandestine process stands in stark contrast to international best practices, where media regulation is subject to extensive parliamentary debate, judicial scrutiny, and civil society participation.

Analysis of the Bill

I. Vague, overbroad, and unconstitutional definitions

 A. Misinformation and Fake News: Undefined danger zones

The Bill defines “misinformation” (Section 2(k)) as a knowingly or recklessly false or inaccurate statement of fact, excluding satire or opinion—unless a “reasonable man” might mistake it for truth. This subjective test invites arbitrary enforcement.

The term “fake news” (Section 2(i)) covers misquotations, distorted videos, and fabrications, but offers no harm threshold or proof requirement. While the harm these phenomena cause is real, the Bill fails to set clear thresholds for harm or intention. Even minor inaccuracies or parodic edits could potentially attract criminal liability, creating a chilling effect on journalism, activism, and online discourse.

This echoes the unconstitutional vagueness that led the Supreme Court to strike down Section 66A of the IT Act in Shreya Singhal v. Union of India (2015), where terms like “offensive” and “menacing” were ruled too vague to be the basis for arrest and prosecution.

The Karnataka Bill repeats the same error, criminalising falsehood without requiring intent to deceive, incite, or defame, contrary to both domestic precedent and global free speech norms.

B. Unconstitutional grounds for speech restriction

Section 3 criminalises misinformation that is “public health, public safety, public tranquillity or the conduct of free and fair elections.” These terms, especially public tranquillity, health, or fair elections, are not defined in the Bill, nor are they part of the constitutionally permissible grounds under Article 19(2) for restricting speech. Even “public tranquillity” is broader and vaguer than “public order”, the actual constitutional category.

In S. Rangarajan v. P. Jagjivan Ram (1989), the Court warned that mere discomfort or offense cannot justify censorship, by providing that anticipated danger should not be remote, conjectural or far-fetched. However, the Karnataka Bill violates this standard.

II. Criminalising Falsehood: Disproportionate and draconian 

A. Harsh jail terms for speech offences

The Bill introduces harsh criminal penalties:

• Section 3(2): 2–5 years’ imprisonment for misinformation.
• Section 7: Up to 7 years’ jail and ₹10 lakh fine for “fake news” posted on social media.
• Section 12: All offences are non-bailable and cognisable.

This is a stunning escalation from existing laws; these are staggering penalties for speech-based offences, harsher than for some forms of assault or property crime. Even defamation, under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita 2023, carries a maximum 2-year sentence. Thus, under the new Bill, an inaccurate tweet or edited meme can trigger a multi-year jail term.

B. Bail denied, presumption of innocence reversed

The offences are made cognisable and non-bailable (Section 12). This means police can arrest without a warrant and courts can deny bail unless the accused proves innocence at the pre-trial stage—effectively reversing the presumption of innocence. Additionally, Section 12 makes it nearly impossible to secure bail. If the Special Public Prosecutor opposes release, the Court must find the accused “not guilty” at the pre-trial stage to grant bail, reversing the presumption of innocence, and creating a perverse system where accusation is equal to incarceration.

This turns pre-trial procedure into punishment, especially in a country where cases can drag on for years. Such disproportionate penalties violate the doctrine of proportionality; a central tenet of Article 19(2) jurisprudence affirmed in Modern Dental College v. State of Madhya Pradesh (2016) and Anuradha Bhasin v. Union of India (2020). A democratic state cannot punish false speech, absent incitement, with the same severity as grave bodily crimes.

III. Politicised censorship through a minister-led “authority” 

A. Executive-only regulator with no safeguards

The core of the Bill is the creation of a Fake News on Social-Media Regulatory Authority (Section 5), chaired by the Minister for Kannada and Culture and comprised mainly of government nominees and industry reps, with no independent experts, civil society members, or judicial oversight. This political body is empowered to decide what constitutes truth, ban content, and recommend prosecution.

Notably absent: journalists, academics, fact-checkers, lawyers, civil society, or independent experts.

This Authority is empowered (Section 6) to:

• Ban content it deems “fake” or “anti-feminist”,
• Block posts that “disrespect Sanatan symbols and beliefs”,
• Permit only “authentic research” on “science, history, religion, philosophy, and literature”.

Nowhere does the Bill define these ideological or cultural categories. As courts have long held, laws restricting speech must be viewpoint-neutral. But here, the Authority becomes a cultural gatekeeper, with the power to censor satire, dissent, and critique based on subjective moral and political filters.

B. Echoes of the Kunal Kamra case

This mirrors the controversial Union Government’s “Fact Checking Unit” (FCU) challenged in Kunal Kamra v. Union of India, where the Bombay High Court had held that empowering an executive body to define truth undermines Article 19(1)(a) and violates principles of neutrality and procedural fairness, and stated that the government cannot be the judge of its own cause when the disputed speech criticises it.

IV. Sanatan Symbols and Anti-Feminism: Ideology masquerading as law

Section 6(b)–(e) mandates banning content that:

• Is “anti-feminist”,
• “Insults female dignity”,
• “Disrespects Sanatan symbols and beliefs”,
• “Promotes superstition”.

These phrases are neither defined nor legally established. For instance, what qualifies as anti-feminist? A critique of gender roles in mythology? A conservative view on family structure?

Similarly, “Sanatan symbols” is a term laden with majoritarian political weight, which is increasingly being invoked to assert Hindu nationalist identity, not just traditional values. By criminalising “disrespect” of such vague and religiously charged symbols, the Bill directly shields majoritarian ideology from critique, violating the secular and pluralist framework of the Constitution.

V. Lack of due process, oversight, and appeal 

A. No notice, no hearing, no remedy

The Bill does not require the Authority to notify or hear the accused before blocking content. There is no requirement for transparency, publishing reasons, or independent appeal. Section 13 empowers Special Courts to issue Correction or Disabling Directions to publishers and platforms based on FIRs. But neither the Authority nor the Court is required to:

• Issue a notice to the accused content creator,
• Hold a hearing before takedown,
• Publish orders or provide reasoned justification.

Only after the order is issued can an aggrieved person approach the same court for variation or cancellation (Section 13(3)), with a final appeal to the High Court under tight timelines (Section 13(4)). Even the appeals mechanism is narrow: only final orders can be appealed to the High Court within 60 days, placing heavy procedural burdens on social media users and journalists to challenge wrongful censorship.

The authority essentially operates in secrecy, and the Special Court’s role is post-facto and limited. This violates every principle of natural justice and prior notice, cornerstones of procedural fairness affirmed repeatedly by Indian courts.

VI. Threat to platforms and safe harbour protections

Section 15 extends liability to companies, intermediaries, and publishers. Their officers may face prosecution unless they can prove they lacked knowledge or took due diligence steps—creating reverse burden of proof.

This undermines the safe harbour principle under Section 79 of the IT Act, where intermediaries are not liable for user-generated content if they act on lawful takedown notices. Here, the spectre of criminal liability will force platforms to over-censor content—resulting in private censorship of public speech. Satirical posts, dissent, or unpopular political views may be purged in fear of triggering the law, thereby silencing democratic debate.

VII. “Good Faith” as a shield for abuse

Section 20 of the Karnataka Fake News Bill provides blanket immunity to the State Government, local authorities, and any government officer for “anything done in good faith” under the Act or its rules and orders. On the face of it, such a clause is standard in many laws. But in the context of this vague, punitive, and executive-driven framework, it becomes a shield for arbitrary and unconstitutional action, with zero accountability.

VIII. What the global standard looks like

Unlike Karnataka’s criminalised model, democratic countries pursue platform accountability and structural transparency, not punitive censorship:

• EU’s Digital Services Act (2024): No criminalisation of misinformation. Platforms must assess and mitigate risks, adjust algorithms, and comply with independent Trusted Flaggers.
• France’s Anti-Disinformation Law (2018): Limited to election periods; takedown orders must come from courts, not executive bodies.

By contrast, the Karnataka Bill places criminal liability on individuals, includes ideological filters, and offers unchecked power to executive actors. No major democracy allows a Minister to declare content fake and imprison users. The Karnataka Bill is dangerously out of step.

Conclusion: Scrap this bill, start over

India does face a disinformation crisis. But the response must not be to turn the state into an arbiter of truth with the power to imprison dissenters. Karnataka’s Misinformation and Fake News Bill, 2025 is not a regulatory framework. It is a blueprint for censorship, criminalisation of dissent, and ideological control of speech. It violates:

• Article 19(1)(a): Free speech and expression
• Article 14: Equality before law
• Article 21: Due process and personal liberty

The Karnataka Misinformation and Fake News (Prohibition) Bill, 2025, as it stands, is an overbroad, punitive, and ideologically skewed instrument that undermines both democracy and digital rights. If enacted, it will severely chill journalism, satire, dissent, research, and digital activism. The right to speak will survive in name, but be rationed in practice.

The complete bill may be accessed below.

Related:

By striking down the IT (Amendment) Rules, 2023 as unconstitutional, Bombay HC curbs Union Govt control over online content

Dissent Note: The alarming scope of Maharashtra’s Special Public Safety Bill, 2024

ECI: Moving from transparency to opacity, the decision to ‘destroy’ CCTV footage after 45 days

Court Acts on Misinformation: FIR against channels for wrongly branding teacher a terrorist

“The law is a shield, not a weapon”: Orissa HC terms demolition without due process a civic wrong, orders 10 lakh compensation

The post Weaponising Truth: A critical analysis of the Karnataka Misinformation and Fake News (Prohibition) Bill, 2025 appeared first on SabrangIndia.

In a letter to Chief Election Commissioner (CEC) Gyanesh Kumar on Tuesday, July 15, written by TDP parliamentary party leader Lavu Sri Krishna Devarayalu and signed by five other party leaders, the party has written: “The scope of the SIR must be clearly defined and must be limited to electoral roll re-correction and inclusion. It should be explicitly communicated that the exercise is not related to citizenship verification, and any field instructions must reflect this distinction.”

The letter was submitted to the statutory body (ECI) after the TDP leaders led a delegation there, as part of an ongoing exercise by the poll panel to take suggestions from political parties to strengthen electoral processes.

CEC Gyanesh Kumar and ECs Dr. Sukhbir Singh Sandhu and Dr. Vivek Joshi had an interaction with a delegation from the Telugu Desam Party led by its State President Shri Palla Srinivasa Rao and received their suggestions at Nirvachan Sadan, New Delhi today. pic.twitter.com/PgKOZsNAA6

— Election Commission of India (@ECISVEEP) July 15, 2025

When queried about the letter, the TDP national spokesperson and one of the signatories, Jyothsna Tirunagari, said there was “no link” between the ongoing SIR in Bihar and the party’s suggestions. “We just met the EC and, as we were asked for suggestions, made our stand clear on the electoral process. We are a democratic party and would want transparency in the electoral process,” she told The Indian Express.

These suggestions by the TDP follow the communication by the poll panel to Chief Electoral Officers (CEOs) of all states on July 5, directing them to begin preparations for a ‘Bihar-like exercise — this time with January 1, 2026, as the qualifying date’.

Days after the Supreme Court questioned the EC on July 10, over the timing of the SIR in Bihar, the TDP letter says that any such electoral roll revision should “not ideally be within six months of any major election”. “To ensure voter confidence and administrative preparedness, the SIR process should be conducted with a sufficient time lead,” the letter says.

The N Chandrababu Naidu-led party has also said that voters included in the electoral rolls must not be required to re-establish their eligibility “unless specific and verifiable reasons are recorded”, and called for a third-party audit under the Comptroller and Auditor General (CAG) to identify anomalies.

Among other suggestions in the letter, include district-wise data on voter addition and deletions with explanations on the EC portal, permission to Aadhaar-based cross-verification, penalties for inaction by EROS (Electoral Registration Officers) and DEOs (District Election Officers), a state-level ombudsman under the EC to handle unresolved grievances, and targeted re-enrolment campaigns for migrant workers, tribal groups and senior citizens.

“Temporary address declarations must be permitted with basic documentation to prevent disenfranchisement of the mobile population… where voters are unable to submit documents at the time of visit, age-wise verification must be permitted,” the letter reads.

Signatories also included party MPs Byreddy Shabari and D Prasada Rao, and TDP state president Palla Srinivasa Rao.

Related:

Bihar:  SC signals that ECI should consider Aadhaar, EPIC (Voter ID card) & Ration card for electoral roll revision 

SC: ECI’s ‘wisdom’ on revision of electoral rolls challenged, does a disenfranchisement crisis loom over Bihar, with thousands being declared ‘‘D’ (doubtful) voters?

Bihar: Sinister move by ECI as ‘intensive’ revision of electoral roles set to exclude vast majority of legitimate voters

Bihar 2025 Election: EC drops parental birth document requirement for 4.96 crore electors and their children in Bihar

The post ‘Define Special Intensive Revision scope… make it clear not linked to citizenship’: BJP ally TDP writes to CEC Gyanesh Kumar appeared first on SabrangIndia.

A recent article by noted economist Indira Hirway, titled “The Hoax of Decline in Poverty in India” and published in The Wire on July 8, 2025, casts serious doubt on official claims of a dramatic fall in poverty rates in India. Hirway critiques the recent estimates by economists C. Rangarajan and S. Mahendra Dev, which assert that extreme poverty declined from 29.5% in 2011–12 to 9.5% in 2022–23, and further to 4.9% in 2023–24—a near 25 percentage-point drop over a decade.

According to the World Bank, using the USD 2.15 per day (2017 Purchasing Power Parity – PPP) international poverty line, extreme poverty in India reportedly fell from 16.2% to 2.3%, translating into around 170 million people lifted out of poverty. However, Hirway contends that this statistical narrative is disconnected from the lived reality of millions of Indians.

“If only 4.9% of people are poor in India, why do 35% of children under five remain stunted, 18.5% wasted, and millions dependent on free food?” she asks, challenging the coherence of official data. She also points out that India is ranked 105th out of 127 countries on the Global Hunger Index, with an “alarming” score of 27.3, and that over 800 million people continue to rely on free grain distributions.

Hirway argues that poverty measurement itself is flawed. She criticizes the Rangarajan Committee’s poverty lines—₹64.66/day for rural areas and ₹91.2/day for urban—as grossly inadequate. “These thresholds are too low to measure meaningful deprivation,” she writes, adding that the World Bank’s USD 2.15 line is also unsuitable for India, a lower-middle-income country where the more appropriate threshold would be USD 3.65/day.

“India’s poverty statistics are not credible,” Hirway states bluntly. “It is time for the country to overhaul its poverty measurement and adopt a more realistic understanding of deprivation and vulnerability.” She notes that 20% of the population is still illiterate, 45% have not studied beyond primary school, and over 90% of the workforce remains informal, lacking any form of job security or social protection.

While acknowledging that economic growth and welfare schemes like food subsidies have played a role, Hirway warns against complacency. “Declaring victory over poverty on the basis of faulty lines hides the structural problems that keep people poor,” she writes.

In conclusion, Hirway calls for a reassessment of India’s poverty metrics: “Poverty is a multidimensional phenomenon. A narrow income-based line cannot capture the lived experience of millions. We must measure poverty in ways that reflect health, education, nutrition, and basic dignity.”

Her article serves as a sobering counterpoint to the optimistic projections of rapid poverty eradication, and a reminder that statistical gains do not always reflect the ground reality of deprivation and inequality in India.

Courtesy: CounterView

The post Behind the numbers: Economist Indira Hirway debunks India’s poverty reduction narrative appeared first on SabrangIndia.

Born in Barabanki, and having earned various degrees from, and having served in several American Universities (California, Chicago, Minnesota, etc.), C.M. Naim had a rich academic life.

For decades, I have been reading C M Naim, his essays, books, columns, translations…. And just a few months back (on January 4, 2025, to be precise), he wrote to me, on email, to encourage me to keep writing on Aligarh Muslim University (AMU).

His email, verbatim, can be read here:

“Dear Prof. Sajjad,

I’m a retired academic, living now in Chicago.

I have been reading your ‘against the grain’ essays and notes in Urdu and was delighted to read your thoughts on Hameed Dalwai.

Muslim elite of all hues have been suffering this victimhood syndrome. They in fact revel in it. The poor, the helpless, those who had no choice in 1947 and their children and grandchildren have suffered. With no end in sight. While the so-called maulanas have flourished, safe in their sanctuaries. English-speaking Muslim public intellectuals have done the same, secure of acceptance and praise from the liberal non-muslim writers, who do a brave job countering their co-religionists opponents but never challenge Salman Khurshid, Talmiz Ahmad, and so many others who never challenged Nadvis and Tablighis.

Keep up the good work. AMU is a hard place to carry such opinions but someone has to be there to help the young think clearly about their lives in India. Our only bosses/clients in academe are our students. We must be honest with them.

Warm regards,

Naim”

Last year, few of us had thought of suggesting that the AMU requests his consent to accept the AMU-established, Sir Syed Excellence Award. He, however refused, rather bluntly, as he did not have very good memories of AMU! He had quit AMU having taught Linguistics briefly.

My 2014 book on Muzaffarpur begins with a quote from his 1999 book, Ambiguities of Heritage: Fictions and Polemics.

In 2014, there was a controversy around access to the central Library of AMU for the undergraduate girls of the Women’s College. I had written a column, disliked by many, particularly those pretending to be feminists or gender activists. They are those who never speak out against the tormentors of the likes of Shaha Bano (1916-1992) and Shayera Bano.

Naim’s letter to the editor in The Indian Express (13 November 2014) was a source of affirmation for what I had written, concurrently. My Rediff column, “AMU gender row: Reinforcing Muslim stereotypes”, was published (Nov 14, 2014). We were on the same page, on the issue.

Naim wrote:

“I am not an admirer of the Aligarh Muslim University (AMU) administration and am strongly opposed to having retired non-academic institutions simply on the basis of religion. But The Indian Express report (‘Row in AMU Over No Library Access to women undergrads’, IE, November 12) on the alleged discrimination at AMU was merely shrill and did not mention much that was highly relevant. First, the matter concerns only undergraduate students, not all women students. Second, undergraduate students are not denied use of the main library during daylight hours. Third, undergraduate girls live in the hostels of the Women’s College, a long distance away from the main library. For their safety after dark—a responsibility of AMU and a commitment to their parents- they will have to be bussed both ways. Fourth, the College has its own library and reading rooms. Have they been found to be inadequate for the undergraduate students? If so, what are the inadequacies for the undergraduate students and can they be easily removed? As far as I understand, the college library is sufficient for the needs of undergraduate students and also has the ability to obtain books for them from the main library if needed. Fifth, again, at issue are the needs of undergraduate girls living in hostels, many of whom would be considered, “minors” in other circumstances. Should we not seek the opinion of their parents, who have entrusted their daughters to AMU? The tweets and the report both displayed only politically correct reactions, not careful thought”.

1. M. Naim, Professor Emeritus, University of Chicago

Soon after, he made an intervention into the EPW (Vol. 50, Issue No. 30, 25 Jul, 2015), through a letter to editor. Caption was “Muslim Communalism”. He wrote:

“While I fully agree with the editorial (“Resisting ‘Sustainable’ Communalism,” EPW, June 27, 2015) and appreciate its urgency and concern, I must point out that there is another similarly corrosive “sustainable” communalism, and that is of a large portion of the Muslim community. It is most obviously expressed in what is easily termed as “sectarian” bias and antagonism. This sectarianism has become more and more blatant in recent years. Then there is also that reflexive communalism that is directed against all Muslims who do not contribute to the sectarianism of these people nor to their exclusivism that is directed against all those Muslims whom they derisively call “secular.” It has been quietly accepted by many liberals in the media. Ordinary Muslim citizens of India need to be protected as much from the communalism of their co-religionists as from what is labelled majoritarian communalism.

C M Naim Chicago”

My friend, Syed Ekram Rizwi had reminded me of his 2010 essay, THE MUSLIM LEAGUE IN BARABANKI: A Suite of Five Sentimental Scenes. This was a wonderful read, full of insights, particularly with regard to the way things unfolded during august 1947 to January 1948 and after.

The same year Naim published a wonderful essay, “Syed Ahmad and His Two Books Called ‘Asar-al-Sanadid’”. This was in the formidable academic journal from the Cambridge University Press, Modern Asian Studies (2011). The chief questions that the paper explored, were, “How do the two books differ from some of the earlier books of relatively similar nature in Persian and Urdu? How radically different are the two books from each other, and why? How and why were they written, and what particular audiences could the author have had in mind in each instance? How were the two books actually received by the public? And, finally, what changes do the two books reflect in the author’s thinking?”

Naim’s EPW (April 27, 2013) essay, “The Maulana Who Loved Krishna”, on F H Hasrat Mohani, was a wonderful read, also carried by the Outlook weekly, in its slightly abridged version. This article reproduces, with English translations, the devotional poems written to the god Krishna by a maulana who was an active participant in the cultural, political and theological life of late colonial north India. Through this, the article gives a glimpse of an Islamicate literary and spiritual world which revelled in syncretism with its surrounding Hindu worlds; and which is under threat of obliteration, even as a memory, in the singular world of globalised Islam of the 21st century.

Another essay by him, “The ‘Shahi Imams’ of India”, Outlook, Nov 27, 2014, offered a historically informed critique of the authority handed over to these anti-historical, superficial characters (clergy), by the unsuspecting, gullible masses of Muslims, not without the support of the state actors of the Indian Republic.

C M Naim’s essays on the portal, New Age Islam, are:

(1) Seminar On Iran Held At Raza Library: Should Such Things Happen At A National Institution In India? (30 June 2012)

(2) “Muslim Press in India and the Bangladesh Crisis” (2 Sept 2013): In this he examined how Muslim public opinion responded to the Bangladesh struggle in 1971, how those responses compare with the reactions in Pakistan, and whether that crisis left any lasting effect on the thinking of Indian Muslims.

Going by what Shyam Benegal (1934-20124) argued in his essay, “Secualrism and Indian Cinema” that the film like “Garm Hawa” could have been made only after the Bangladesh (1971) issue which convinced the hitherto un-convinced Muslims of India that religion could not serve as a binding force of nationalism.

(3) “Another Lesson in History” (19 Sept 2013);

(4) “English/Urdu Bipolarity Syndrome in Pakistan” (19 Dec 2014)

(5) “Listen To Sonu Nigam, Please” (20 April 2017)

His essays are available on his website: https://cmnaim.com/; This includes his essays published in the Annual of Urdu Studies (Wisconsin, USA), which he edited too, and his EPW (June 17, 1995) essay, “Popular Jokes and Political History: The Case of Akbar, Birbal and Mulla Do-Piyaza“.

In 2004, he brought out a collection of his essays, Urdu Texts and Contexts. The book primarily focuses on Urdu poetry, offering fresh perspectives on diverse Urdu texts and their significance in India’s cultural history. It explores literary, social, and performative contexts associated with Urdu in South Asia and beyond, addressing themes such as Urdu poetry (including ghazal and marsiya), the sociology of literature, and the social history of Muslims in North India. The essays cover topics like the works of poets such as Ghalib and Mir Taqi Mir, the musha’irah tradition, and the role of Urdu in education and popular fiction. Naim’s accessible yet scholarly approach makes the book valuable for those interested in Urdu literature and South Asian cultural studies.

Naim’s latest (2023) book, Urdu Crime Fiction, 1890–1950: An Informal History, is a meticulously researched exploration of the origins and evolution of Urdu crime fiction, or jāsūsī adab, during its formative years in colonial India. The genre, initially inspired by 19th-century European and North American crime fiction, was adapted into Urdu through translations, transcreations, and original works. The book highlights key figures like Tirath Ram Ferozepuri (1857-1924), who translated over 114 titles (spanning 60,000 pages), and Zafar Omar, whose 1916 transcreation of Maurice Leblanc’s Arsène Lupin as Bahram in Nili Chhatri (The Blue Parasol) became a cultural phenomenon. Other notable contributors include Nadeem Sahba’i, known for imaginative Urdu pulp fiction.

Naim details how Urdu thrillers, with evocative titles like Khūnī Chhatrī (The Murderous Umbrella) and Mistrīz af Dihlī (The Mysteries of Delhi), captivated readers with their “wonder-inducing” and “sleep-depriving” narratives, selling thousands of copies.

These works reflected urban India’s modernity, incorporating elements like mannequins, cameras, and truth serums, while depicting secular spaces—railway stations, public parks, and cinemas—where diverse identities mingled. The book also notes the influence of Western authors like G.W.M. Reynolds and the absence of female Urdu crime fiction writers during this period.

Naim’s primary focus is on the genre’s development before 1950, slightly predating Ibn-e-Safi’s most prolific period. Naim acknowledges Ibn-e-Safi (pen name of Asrar Ahmad, 1928–1980) as a transformative figure who elevated Urdu detective fiction to new heights in the post-independence era.

While earlier writers like Tirath Ram Ferozepuri focused on translations or transcreations of Western works, Ibn-e-Safi’s original stories, blending suspense, humour, and social commentary, popularized the genre further, making it a cultural staple in South Asia.

We will miss the “against the grain” essays of C M Naim which were incredibly historically informed.

Rest in Peace Naim sahib!

Related:

One of Urdu’s Greatest Scholars, C.M. Naim, Passes Away

The post Indian Muslims need to be protected as much from the communalism of their co-religionists as majoritarian communalism: In remembrance of CM Naim appeared first on SabrangIndia.

A founding editor of many journals and prolific commentator, his voice resonated on all matters to do with Urdu language, culture and its politics as things got dire for Urdu in the sub-continent, the place of its birth.

He has been Consultant to the Asian Literature Program of the Asia Society, New York City, Princeton University Press, University of Chicago Press, University of California Press, Feminist Press, Shastri Indo-Canadian Institute and the National Endowment for the Humanities. He had also served as Member, South Asia Regional Council, Association for Asian Studies, 1976-79, of the Committee on Scholars of Asian Descent, Association for Asian Studies, 1981-84, then South Asia Regional Council, Association for Asian Studies, 1990-93. He has been on the Advisory Committee, Berkeley Urdu Language Program in Pakistan, University of California, Berkeley, as well as Member, Board of Trustees, America-Pakistan Research Organization, 1989-93 and also Member, Board of Trustees, American Institute of Pakistan Studies, 1993-95.

Naim unhesitatingly tackled political issues along with his serious work on pure literary debates. In 1989, after a visit to Palestine, he wrote powerful words on what he saw, words that are especially relevant today.

One of his more recent works, an example of his enduring connection to all that was Urdu, was Urdu Crime Fiction, 1890–1950: An Informal History  which came out in 2023.

How did Naim feel on his first day in the United States? His observations were recalled as friends and colleagues remembered his contributions and tributes poured in.

For The Wire, Naim wrote sadly on how there is now no major Urdu newspaper or magazine that is edited by a non-Muslim and how in the past 75 years, the culture of Urdu magazines read by families of all faiths has disappeared. In another piece full of characteristic edge, Naim gently chastised  brands for never using the letter ‘j’ while transliterating Urdu words.

Courtesy: The Wire

The post One of Urdu’s Greatest Scholars, C.M. Naim, Passes Away appeared first on SabrangIndia.

The petitioners contend that the ECI’s decision to conduct the SIR is arbitrary, lacks proper justification, and infringes upon fundamental rights guaranteed by Articles 14, 19, and 21 of the Constitution. A key aspect the Court will examine is whether the SIR process violates principles of due process and natural justice, particularly concerning potential voter deletions. Furthermore, the petitioners have questioned the practicality and reasonableness of the timeline set for the SIR.

This issue is not merely a legal one; it has become a focal point of concern among opposition political parties and civil rights activists. The timing of the SIR, just months before the Bihar Assembly Elections, has raised questions. In January 2025, the final electoral rolls for the state Vidhan Sabha (VS) elections had been finalised. The SIR has, moreover been analysed by many including Sabrangindia to be a sinister move since the constitutional body appears to be “Usurping the powers to test ‘Indian citizenship’, powers that do not lie with the ECI, the latest move by CEC Gyanesh Kumar is not just unlawful and hasty but violative of the Indian Constitution and the Representation of Peoples Act, 1950 and the Registration of Electors Rules, 1960.”

Political commentators and civil rights activists have also viewed it as a potential strategy to disenfranchise a substantial number of voters, especially those from marginalised communities. The apprehension is that if these voters cannot produce specific documents alongside the enumeration forms, they could be unjustly removed from the electoral rolls, effectively shifting the burden of inclusion onto the most vulnerable and transforming a fundamental right into a document-centric ordeal. The eleven listed documents are inaccessible to many small farmers, landless labourers, migrant worker communities and women. The documents requested for this revision are largely not proofs of Indian citizenship, and with the exception of a birth certificate, none verify the date or place of birth in India.

The ECI move –politically guided and driven –appears clearly to be motivated by a clear desire to disenfranchise the unlettered voter who “owns no property.” Worse, after the “announcement” to the effect that “all electors must submit an enumeration form, and those registered after 2003 have to additionally provide documentation establishing their citizenship violates not just the Constitution but Clause 15 and 19 of the Representation of People’s Act, 1950!

Special Intensive Revision (SIR) in Bihar

On June 24, 2025, the ECI formally announced the initiation of a Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls across all assembly constituencies in Bihar. The ECI has framed this intensified exercise as crucial for maintaining the integrity of the democratic process and ensuring free and fair elections. While the Commission has stated its intent to eventually roll out SIR nationwide as a constitutional mandate, Bihar has been prioritised due to the upcoming legislative assembly elections later in 2025. The SIR for other states is expected to be announced subsequently.

The ECI has cited a combination of demographic and administrative factors to justify this comprehensive revision. These include rapid urbanisation, frequent migration patterns, the continuous addition of newly eligible young voters, the underreporting of deaths, and, significantly, the need to address the potential inclusion of foreign illegal immigrants on voter lists. The explicitly stated objectives of the SIR are threefold: to ensure every eligible citizen is enrolled without exclusion, to purge the rolls of any ineligible voters, and to systematically remove names of individuals who are deceased, have permanently shifted their residence, or are otherwise absent.

Implementation and initial stringent documentary requirements

To implement this revision, the ECI established a clear procedural framework. The electoral roll from 2003, with a qualifying date of January 1, 2003, was designated as the foundational or “probative” evidence of eligibility. Electoral Registration Officers (EROs) were directed to presume the citizenship of individuals on this roll unless contradictory information emerged. However, the SIR introduced new and notably stringent requirements for those not listed on the 2003 roll or for younger voters. Opposition parties have demanded that the Electoral Rolls used for the Lok Sabha polls of 2024 should be the base rolls used for the revision.

Initially, any person whose name did not appear on the 2003 Electoral Roll was required to submit proof of eligibility from a prescribed list of government-issued documents. The process was even more rigorous for citizens born after 1987. For instance, an individual born between July 1, 1987, and December 2, 2004, had to furnish an approved document for themselves and a separate document for either their father or mother to establish their date and/or place of birth. For anyone born after December 2, 2004, the requirement was stricter still: they had to provide their own documentation in addition to documents for both their father and mother. If one parent was not an Indian citizen, a copy of their passport and visa from the time of the elector’s birth was to be submitted.

Crucially, the Aadhaar card, Ration Card and the Elector’s Photo Identity Card (EPIC) were conspicuously absent from the list of eleven acceptable proofs. The validated documents included passports, birth certificates, matriculation certificates, permanent residence certificates, SC/ST/OBC certificates, and various other official documents issued by government authorities, banks, or PSUs prior to July 1, 1987, such as identity cards, pension orders, land allotment certificates, or entries in the National Register of Citizens (though not applicable to Bihar).

This initial stringent requirement raised concerns about potential discrimination. While individuals in certain societal positions (e.g., government servants, landholders) might more easily produce documents, others, particularly those born in the 1970s and 1980s for whom birth certificates are often scarce, were left heavily reliant on this single, often unavailable, document.

Furthermore, the provision exempting those on the 2003 voter list from producing documents was criticised as discriminatory, as it bypassed the very verification process being applied to others.

Backtracking from initial stringent conditions: ECI drops parental birth document requirement

Responding to the formidable backlash that ensued, the ECI announced substantial relaxations to its controversial SIR requirements in Bihar on June 30, 2025. This effectively reversed its initial stringent demand for parental birth documents. The backtrack came in direct response to intense criticism from opposition parties and civil society, who had vehemently protested the original June 24 directive as an impractical disenfranchisement risk and a covert attempt to introduce a National Register of Citizens (NRC).

Under the revised guidelines, the ECI now leverages the 2003 Bihar electoral roll, which contains 4.96 crore electors, as a primary verification tool. Individuals born after 1987 are no longer required to provide their parents’ birth documentation if either their own name or their parents’ names appear on this 2003 list. This change is projected to streamline the process for approximately 60% of the state’s electorate, who can now simply verify their details against the 2003 data and submit an enumeration form. Even if an elector’s name is absent from the 2003 roll, they can use an extract from it to substantiate their parents’ details without needing further corroborating documents, although they must still provide their own proof of eligibility.

This move, a clear afterthought is however likely to adversely impact vast sections of Bihar’s youth that reel under an absence of access and documentation.

While rolling back the contentious measures, the ECI defended the underlying principle of the SIR, framing it as a fundamental statutory exercise mandated by the Representation of the People Act, 1950, and a routine part of maintaining accurate electoral rolls for over 75 years. To facilitate this revised process, the Commission has directed that the 2003 rolls be made widely available to Booth Level Officers in hard copy and accessible to the public for download on its website.

Bihar: the most document scarce state in the country

Reliable studies consistently show Bihar to be among the most “document scarce” states in India, a critical factor that amplifies the challenges of the ECI’s voter verification drive and its “proof of citizenship” demands. An analysis of the 11 documents initially suggested as proof reveals significant limitations in their widespread availability.

For instance, identity or pension cards from government undertakings or PSUs are an option, yet data from the 2022 caste census indicate that less than 2% of voting-age Biharis hold government jobs, rendering this proof largely inaccessible for the majority. Birth certificates are another problematic requirement; the National Family Health Survey-3 (NFHS-3) shows only 2.8% of Bihar’s population born between 2001 and 2005 possess them, with the percentage likely even lower for older generations. Similarly, only about 2.4% of Biharis possess passports.

Latest 2022 statistics by the Civil Registration System (CRS) 2022[1] show that Bihar is among 14 states like Tripura, Assam, Telangana, West Bengal, Kerala, Jharkhand, Ladakh, Uttar Pradesh, Karnataka, Rajasthan, Meghalaya, Delhi and Jammu & Kashmir that are in the “the category of more than 50 percent to less than of registration of births” (Statement 12, page 38 of the documenyt) This government document shows that Bihar has 61.2 % (Registered Births in Rural Bihar, 2022) 38.8 % (Registered Birth in Urban Bihar) (Statement 18, Page 47).

While matriculation certificates are more common, with the National Family Health Survey-2 (NFHS-2) and NFHS-5 revealing that approximately 45-50% of 18–40-year-olds are matriculates, a substantial gender gap persists. Forest rights certificates, while an option, are relevant to a minuscule segment of the population, given that Scheduled Tribes constitute just 1.3% of Bihar’s populace, and only a fraction of those actually reside in forest areas. Caste certificates (OBC, SC, or ST), according to the India Human Development Survey-2 (2011-12), were possessed by about 16% of Biharis, roughly one in four households in these categories; upper castes, by definition, would not hold such certificates. Furthermore, the presence in an NRC or family register, both listed as proofs, is not applicable to Bihar. Lastly, government-issued land/house allotment certificates are suggested, but these are not provided for beneficiaries of schemes like the PM Awas Yojana, leaving ambiguity about who receives such documents and their overall coverage. These data, highlighted in The Hindu on July 1, 2025.

The emerging concern: from voter to doubtful/disputed voter – a looming fear

A series of electoral and administrative procedures creates a perilous journey for individuals whose citizenship comes under scrutiny—an exercise that has to be performed under due process by the state and not the ECI–potentially transforming a routine voter verification into a path towards disenfranchisement and the daunting status of a “suspected foreigner.” This process, ostensibly aimed at ensuring the integrity of electoral rolls, is fraught with measures that can lead to severe and life-altering consequences for those unable to meet documentation requirements. The situation unfolds in a connected sequence of events, each escalating the potential for an individual to lose their right to vote and, ultimately, their claim to citizenship.

The initial point of concern arises from the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls. While being on the electoral roll is not a definitive guarantee of citizenship, the SIR process itself subjects existing electors to rigorous scrutiny. The true fear for individuals begins with a specific guideline within the Election Commission’s order dated June 24, 2025. Para 5(b) of these guidelines empowers Electoral Registration Officers (EROs) with a critical and twofold authority: if an elector fails to produce documents that satisfy the ERO, the officer can not only delete their name from the voter list but is also mandated to report that individual to the “competent authority” as a “suspected foreigner.” This single provision creates a high-stakes scenario where the inability to provide the required, and often ambiguously defined, documentation can instantly escalate a person’s status from a voter to a suspected foreigner, a direction criticised as draconian and arbitrary.

Once a person is flagged as having “doubtful/disputed” citizenship, a significant and immediate consequence is the suspension of their voting rights. The process dictates that individuals whose names are entered provisionally in the electoral rolls, marked with the letter ‘D’ to signify their doubtful status, are debarred from casting their vote. This prohibition is not temporary; it may extend to all future general elections to the Lok Sabha and any State Legislative Assembly elections. The individual remains in this state of civic limbo, stripped of a fundamental right while their case navigates a complex legal system.

The question that is being raised is, is the citizenship of thousands of Indians being tested in this rather surreptitious way?

Post-SIR: what can be next for voters who become doubtful/disputed voters?

The pattern that seems to be emerging from the politically-directed ECI’s move is that the union government wishes to use elections to introduce an Assam-like situation in the state without any legislative backing.  Due to the peculiar situation in that state post-Independence and that which emerged before and after the Assam Accord, two laws, the Foreigners Act of 1946 (now repealed by the Foreigners Act 2025) and the now repealed Illegal Migration Determination of Tribunals Act, 1983. In Assam, following an ECI Order of 1998 and directions before that hundreds of thousands of voters were declared ‘D’ Voters (doubtful voters) with their status to be adjudicated by Foreigner Tribunals (FTs) in the state. Twenty seven years later there remain approximately 1.2 lakh such disenfranchised citizens who have not been able to cast their vote. In Assam, laws mandated the formation of the FTs that have been since strongly critiqued for not functioning with a clear constitutional framework that follows the Indian law of evidence; in Bihar and the rest of India where the ECI has threatened to bring in the expanded SIR, there exists no law that mandates the formation of such Tribunals.

Under the prevalent practice in Assam –the ultimate decision concerning the “doubtful/disputed” persons in electoral roll lies with the Election Commission of India (ECI). When the commission is not satisfied and has reasonable doubt about the citizenship of any person, it can refer all such cases to the competent authority, which has been mandated to be the tribunal under the Foreigners Act, 1946.

A person whose citizenship status is in question and under consideration before a Foreigners Tribunal is not eligible to vote unless the Tribunal decides in their favour that they are a citizen of India. As mentioned above, if this adjudication process is mired in bureaucratic delay, the constitutional right to vote is denied. This is because individuals whose citizenship status is doubtful or disputed, as indicated by a ‘D’ against their names in the electoral rolls, shall be barred from casting their vote in any ensuing general election. This restriction will persist until an appropriate Tribunal determines their citizenship status in their favour. The looming threat of an adverse tribunal decision, leading to an official declaration as a foreigner, brings with it the profound fear of potential detention and the complete forfeiture of all rights and the sense of belonging in their country. To repeat there exists no legislative framework for this exercise and the manner in which it is being conducted under executive diktat presently.

The constitutional and statutory bedrock

The entire electoral revision process is firmly anchored in India’s constitutional and legal framework governing elections. The foundational provisions for these regulations are Articles 326 and 327 of the Constitution. Article 326 establishes the principle of adult suffrage, stating that elections shall be held on the basis that every citizen of India, aged at least eighteen, is entitled to be registered as a voter, provided they are not otherwise disqualified by law. This article makes Indian citizenship a non-negotiable prerequisite for voting rights. Article 327 further empowers Parliament to enact laws concerning all election-related matters, including the preparation of electoral rolls. However, this power is explicitly “subject to the provisions of the Constitution,” meaning any law passed by Parliament must align with the principles outlined in Article 326.

Acting under this constitutional authority, Parliament enacted the Representation of the People’s Act, 1950 (for registration) and the Representation of the People’s Act, 1951 (for the conduct of elections). Section 16 of the 1950 Act details the “disqualifications for registration,” prominently stating that a person who is not a citizen of India is disqualified. In conjunction, Section 62 of the 1951 Act outlines the “right to vote.” While sub-section (1) of Section 62 entitles a person entered on the electoral roll to vote, sub-section (2) acts as a crucial check, stating that no person shall vote if they are subject to any disqualification mentioned in Section 16 of the 1950 Act. This unequivocally clarifies that even if a non-citizen’s name is erroneously present on a voter list, they possess no legal right to cast a ballot. The inquiry into these qualifications is conducted during the preparation and revision of electoral rolls, and if a person is found disqualified, their name can be struck off, and they are barred from voting.

ECI deploys BLOs for house-to-house voter verification

In Bihar, the ECI has deployed thousands of Booth Level Officers (BLOs) to conduct a comprehensive house-to-house voter verification drive. As per instructions, BLOs will conduct door-to-door surveys, distributing and collecting pre-filled enumeration forms along with supporting documents from existing electors. These forms are also downloadable from the ECI website or can be filled and uploaded online. For transparency and privacy, verification documents will be uploaded to ECINET, a secure platform accessible only to authorised election officials.

The ECI has also urged active participation from political parties, requesting them to appoint Booth Level Agents (BLAs) to help resolve discrepancies early in the process. Claims and objections raised by electors or political parties will be assessed by Assistant Electoral Registration Officers (AEROs). The final electoral roll will be published by Electoral Registration Officers (EROs) after all claims and objections have been resolved. These draft final rolls are slated for publication on August 1, 2025, and will be made publicly accessible on the ECI and Chief Electoral Officer websites, in addition to being shared with recognised political parties.

Plenary powers of the Election Commission

Article 324 of the Constitution serves as a foundational provision, entrusting the ECI with comprehensive responsibility for conducting both national and state elections. This includes the essential powers required to fulfill that duty effectively. Specifically, Article 324 grants the ECI plenary powers of superintendence, direction, and control over the preparation of electoral rolls and the conduct of elections for Parliament and every State Legislature. These powers are particularly crucial in areas where specific legislation is absent. Sections 21 and 22 of the Representation of the People Act, 1950 (RP Act, 1950), explicitly acknowledge the Commission’s authority to issue general or special directions concerning the preparation and correction of electoral rolls.

It’s important to note that the Supreme Court, in Mohinder Singh Gill vs. Chief Election Comr. (1978) 1 SCC 405, clarified the limits of this broad authority. The Court ruled that while the ECI can issue instructions and orders in areas not covered by legislation, this power must not be exercised in a malicious, arbitrary, or biased manner, nor without due consideration.

SIR Status till July 8

As of June 24, 2025, Bihar’s electoral roll comprised approximately 7.90 crore electors (7,89,69,844). The ECI has reported significant progress in the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) exercise. By July 5, 2025, at 6:00 PM, 1.04 crore Enumeration Forms (13.19% of total electors) had been submitted, with 93.57% of forms distributed. This momentum continued, with 1.69 crore forms (21.46%) received by July 6, 2025, 6:00 PM, including 65.33 lakh collected in the preceding 24 hours. As of July 7, 2025, 6:00 PM, submissions surged to 2.88 crore forms (36.47% of total electors), with 1.18 crore collected in the last 24 hours. The ECI anticipates completing the collection of Enumeration Forms well before the July 25, 2025 deadline, having already received 3.71 crore forms (46.95% of total electors) by 6:00 PM on July 8, just 14 days after the SIR instructions were issued.

It is likely, if the Supreme Court understands the wider and problematic implications of the present exercise, that the petitions will be extensively heard and argued. The people of India will await with concern their outcome.

Related

Bihar: Sinister move by ECI as ‘intensive’ revision of electoral roles set to exclude vast majority of legitimate voters

Bihar 2025 Election: EC drops parental birth document requirement for 4.96 crore electors and their children in Bihar

The Erased Record: A constitutional challenge to the election commission’s 45-day data destruction mandate

[1] VITAL STATISTICS OF INDIA BASED ON THE CIVIL REGISTRATION SYSTEM 2022 brought out by the OFFICE OF THE REGISTRAR GENERAL, INDIA MINISTRY OF HOME AFFAIRS VITAL STATISTICS DIVISION CIVIL REGISTRATION SYSTEM SECTION

The post SC: ECI’s ‘wisdom’ on revision of electoral rolls challenged, does a disenfranchisement crisis loom over Bihar, with thousands being declared ‘‘D’ (doubtful) voters? appeared first on SabrangIndia.

“We are verifying their proof of Indian citizenship and other details like how they came to Odisha,” Parmar stated, as per the report of The Hindu.

The individuals detained are primarily engaged in construction, mining, and industrial labour, and have been residing in various parts of western Odisha. Police sources admit that many of these workers are long-time residents, while others have migrated recently for work, according to The New Indian Express.

MHA-led crackdown, coastal surveillance, and STF deployment

Citing an internal MHA directive, state authorities have activated STFs in all districts — each headed by the respective Superintendent of Police and assisted by a Foreigners Registration Officer (FRO). Their mandate is unambiguous: detect, identify, and deport any individual who fails to furnish documentation proving Indian citizenship.

The Odisha government has gone further by identifying a disused jail in Athagarh as a state-level holding centre. Districts have also been instructed to locate additional temporary holding centres for those detained pending verification.

This sweeping action aligns with the priorities of the newly elected BJP government in Odisha, led by Chief Minister Mohan Charan Majhi, who has made the “removal of illegal immigrants” a central plank of his administration. During a recent visit to Kendrapada, Majhi ordered district officials to coordinate with central intelligence agencies and “take strict legal action” against undocumented Bangladeshi nationals, calling the move essential for “national security”, as reported by The New Indian Express.

Odisha’s 480-km coastline is frequently cited by state authorities as a vulnerability point for unauthorized maritime entry, especially into coastal districts such as Kendrapada, Jagatsinghpur, Bhadrak, and Balasore. Officials allege that many undocumented persons arrive via the sea route and gradually disperse inland for employment.

West Bengal Slams Odisha for “Barbaric Attitude” Towards Migrants

The detentions have triggered sharp political reactions from West Bengal, where many of the detained workers hail from. A significant number reportedly belong to districts such as Murshidabad, Nadia, Malda, Birbhum, Purba Bardhaman, and South 24 Parganas.

Samirul Islam, Trinamool Congress MP and migrant rights advocate, publicly accused the Odisha BJP government of engaging in linguistic and ethnic profiling: “Once again, atrocities against Bengali-speaking migrant workers continue in Odisha’s Jharsuguda district. The BJP-ruled Odisha government recently detained over 200 migrant workers from various districts of Bengal — including Murshidabad, Birbhum,Malda, Nadia, Purba Burdwan, and South 24 Parganas — on suspicion of being Bangladeshi nationals. This is a fresh round of detentions by the BJP-ruled Odisha government, following the earlier confinement of hundreds of migrant workers from Bengal. What is their fault? That they speak Bengali? What grudge do @narendramodi and @AmitShah hold against these poor Bengalis? Despite our repeated appeals, the top BJP leadership seems least bothered to address the plight of these Bengali-speaking individuals. Will they at least consult with @Odisha_CMO to understand their situation? We have already moved the court. If this barbaric attitude continues, we will launch a larger movement against such practices. Our Chief Secretary has also written to Chief Secretary Odisha regarding the plight of the Bengali speaking migrant population Our Chief Minister, @MamataOfficial, has already made it clear: Bengal will not tolerate any move that causes suffering to our people working in other states.”

Once again, atrocities against Bengali-speaking migrant workers continue in Odisha’s Jharsuguda district.
The BJP-ruled Odisha government recently detained over 200 migrant workers from various districts of Bengal — including Murshidabad, Birbhum,Malda, Nadia, Purba Burdwan, and… pic.twitter.com/FL2WN2CsS2

— Samirul Islam (@SamirulAITC) July 9, 2025

He confirmed that West Bengal’s Chief Secretary has written to his Odisha counterpart, seeking clarity and intervention. Islam also warned of legal and mass mobilization if detentions continue without justification.

Echoing the outrage, senior TMC MP Mahua Moitra wrote: “23 workers from Nadia being held in illegal detention in Jharsuguda. I urge @SecyChief @DGPOdisha to release immediately. Never happened in 24 years of @Naveen_Odisha & now it is daily occurrence.”

23 workers from Nadia being held in illegal detention in Jharsuguda. I urge @SecyChief @DGPOdisha to release immediately. Never happened in 24 years of @Naveen_Odisha & now it is daily occurrence. Do not think there is no-one to fight for these workers. pic.twitter.com/n4WMBFQlB6

— Mahua Moitra (@MahuaMoitra) July 9, 2025

In another tweet, Moitra cited a clearance report from the Krishnanagar Police Department confirming the Indian identity of many of those detained, and appealed for their immediate release: “@himanshulalips verification report of all persons given by @KrishnanagarPD. Full check completed. Please release asap. Delay is denial.”

‘ @himanshulalips verification report of all persons given by @KrishnanagarPD. Full check completed. Please release asap. Delay is denial. @SecyChief @DGPOdisha pic.twitter.com/5OuXUEw9Jw

— Mahua Moitra (@MahuaMoitra) July 9, 2025

Paradip detention of a reportedly Bangladeshi family raises coastal security questions

Separately, four individuals from a single family, reportedly Bangladeshi nationals, were detained by Paradip Police in Jagatsinghpur district on July 8. Identified as Kirati Sardar (40), his wife Simili (38), daughter Jaya (19) and son Jay (17), the family allegedly arrived by sea from Khulna, Bangladesh, in May and entered West Bengal via Babughat. After a brief stay in Piali, they travelled to Paradip in search of work.

Paradip police, led by IIC Rasmiranjan Das, detained them from the home of a local resident following a tip-off. Officials confirmed that the family lacked Aadhaar or any Indian identity documentation, and they are now slated for deportation via the Border Security Force (BSF), pending district-level approval.

Local resident Kamla Gayana, as reported by The New Indian Express, who had sheltered the family, told reporters: “They said they were living under miserable conditions in Bangladesh and preferred death over deportation.”

The case has intensified scrutiny over coastal surveillance systems. Despite Odisha’s repeated assurances about enhanced naval, Coast Guard, marine police, and fisheries department patrols, such sea entries continue, prompting questions about enforcement gaps.

The numbers and the silence

While an official March 2025 Assembly reply pegged the number of undocumented Bangladeshi migrants in Odisha at 3,740, senior officials admit the actual figure is likely far higher. However, questions need to be raised regarding the criteria and process being used to declare people as “illegal”, especially when detentions overwhelmingly affect poor, Bengali-speaking labourers. Critics argue that linguistic profiling, rather than concrete evidence, is being used as a blunt tool for mass detentions and potential deportations.

What remains deeply concerning is the complete absence of legal representation, independent verification, or human rights oversight in these processes. Most detainees are held without access to legal aid, family contact, or due process.

Conclusion: Law enforcement or linguistic witch-hunt?

As the Jharsuguda crackdown widens and detentions continue across coastal districts like Paradip, Odisha’s BJP government faces growing accusations of turning the question of undocumented immigration into a communal and ethnic flashpoint.

While the state cites MHA directives and “national security” to justify its actions, the lack of procedural safeguards, combined with overwhelming political targeting of Bengali-speaking migrants, threatens to escalate into a full-blown constitutional crisis, one that pits federalism and fundamental rights against a rising tide of xenophobic enforcement.

The Odisha government now faces a choice: transparent verification rooted in law or a descent into detention-driven populism.

Related:

Bordering on illegality? 18 alleged Bangladeshis “pushed back” without due process, Legal challenge filed in High Court

other Pushback Halted: SC stays deportation of woman declared foreigner, issues notice on challenge to Gauhati HC order

After incorrect detention claim, Gauhati HC was informed that Doyjan Bibi was handed over to BSF

“Bail once granted can’t be ignored”: Gauhati HC seeks legal basis for re-detentions of COVID-era released detainees

The post Bengali-Speaking Migrants Detained En Masse in Odisha: National security or targeted persecution? appeared first on SabrangIndia.