Tue Oct 07 04:53:49 UTC 2025: Here’s a summary of the text and a rewrite as a news article:
**Summary:**
The Supreme Court is hearing arguments regarding the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls in Bihar, conducted by the Election Commission of India (ECI) prior to the upcoming Assembly elections. Petitioners are challenging the validity of the SIR, alleging mass exclusions of voters and a lack of transparency, particularly regarding the deletion of names from the electoral rolls. The ECI maintains it has exclusive jurisdiction over electoral roll revisions and is acting within the law. The court is pressing for specific evidence of disenfranchisement, and scrutinizing the transparency of the deletion process, demanding clarity on whether deleted voters were previously excluded or new additions. While data suggests that Muslims were not disproportionately impacted in the deletion process, the case raises concerns about potential disenfranchisement of migrant workers, particularly women, and the overall integrity of the electoral process.
**News Article:**
**Supreme Court Hears Challenge to Bihar Electoral Roll Revision Amid Disenfranchisement Concerns**
**New Delhi, October 7, 2025** – The Supreme Court today heard final arguments regarding the validity of the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls in Bihar, a process undertaken by the Election Commission of India (ECI) in preparation for the upcoming Assembly elections. The hearing comes amidst concerns raised by petitioners alleging widespread voter disenfranchisement and a lack of transparency in the revision process.
A bench of Justices Surya Kant and Joymalya Bagchi is scrutinizing the SIR, with petitioners arguing that the process led to the mass exclusion of eligible voters. Advocate Prashant Bhushan told the court that the SIR has resulted in 7% reduction of voters and disproportionate exclusion of minority and women voters in Bihar. While the ECI released the final electoral rolls on September 30, 2025, with nearly 7.42 crore names, concerns remain about the 65 lakh names deleted during the SIR.
The ECI, represented by Adv. Rakesh Dwivedi, asserts its exclusive constitutional authority over electoral roll revisions, citing Article 324 of the Constitution. The ECI maintains that the deletions were primarily due to permanent migration, death, or multiple enrollments, and that affected parties have not lodged complaints.
However, the court pressed for more transparency. Justice Bagchi questioned whether the addition of names in the final voters list are the earlier excluded ones or new ones. Justice Kant demanded specific evidence of individuals who were wrongly removed from the rolls, suggesting that individuals file affidavits stating that they have been deleted. The Court also issued a notice to ECI regarding a petition highlighting a lack of transparency about the people deleted from the final list.
The case highlights a tension between the ECI’s administrative power over electoral processes and the fundamental right of citizens to vote. While an analysis suggests that the deletion of Muslim electors was proportionate to their population in the state, questions remain about the impact on migrant workers, particularly women, and the overall fairness of the SIR process.
The hearing continues, with the Supreme Court expected to issue a ruling that could have significant implications for the upcoming Bihar Assembly elections and potentially, for future electoral roll revisions nationwide. The ECI has indicated it plans a nationwide Special Intensive Revision by 2026.
First Piper 