99% Voters In West Bengal Given SIR Forms; Claims Of Mass Disenfranchisement Baseless : ECI Tells Supreme Court

The Election Commission of India (ECI) has told the Supreme Court that allegations of large-scale disenfranchisement of voters in West Bengal due to the ongoing Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls are “highly exaggerated” and being amplified to serve “vested political interests.”

In a counter-affidavit filed by the Commission in response to a PIL by MP Dola Sen challenging the legality of SIR orders issued on 24 June and 27 October 2025, it asserted that the process is constitutionally mandated, well-established, and regularly conducted. The ECI argues that the exercise is essential for ensuring purity and integrity of electoral rolls, a constitutional requirement recognised by the Supreme Court in T.N. Seshan, CEC v. Union of India (1995).

The Commission emphasised that the SIR is firmly rooted in Article 324 of the Constitution and Sections 15, 21 and 23 of the Representation of the People Act, 1950, which empower the ECI to undertake special revisions of the electoral rolls whenever necessary. The affidavit notes that similar revisions have been periodically conducted since the 1950s, including nationwide revisions in years such as 1962-66, 1983-87, 1992, 1993, 2002 and 2004.

Referring to rapid urbanisation and high mobility of voters over the last two decades, the ECI said that additions and deletions on a large scale have become a “regular trend,” leading to risks of duplicate and inaccurate entries. These concerns, along with frequent complaints from political parties across the country, contributed to the decision to undertake a pan-India Special Intensive Revision.

ECI rejects claims of faulty SIR process  

Dola Sen's petition contends that the SIR orders are arbitrary, unconstitutional and will lead to invalid deletion of genuine voters. The ECI in its counter has denied all allegations and said the petition is “incorrect and denied in totality” except where expressly admitted.

The Commission highlighted that no elector is to be removed without following the procedure prescribed under the law, and stressed that the SIR guidelines themselves contain safeguards to ensure inclusiveness.

 99.77 percent of electors given forms

The affidavit mentioned that  99.77 percent of existing electors have been supplied with pre-filled enumeration forms and 70.14 percent of filled-in forms have been received back.

These figures, the ECI argues, “demonstrate that the claims of the Petitioner regarding errors in implementation, under-inclusiveness and mass disenfranchisement are highly exaggerated.”

The Commission asserts that allegations of large-scale deletion in West Bengal are not based on facts but are being advanced as a “narrative” through media “to serve vested political interests.”

The ECI stated that Booth Level Officers (BLOs) are mandated to visit households, distribute enumeration forms and collect filled-in forms. If a house is locked, the BLO must leave repeated notices and make three attempts. BLOs are barred from collecting any documents from electors during enumeration, a modification introduced in the Phase-II SIR order dated 27 October 2025.

The Commission also said electors temporarily away from home may have forms submitted on their behalf by family members or can submit forms online through the ECI portal or mobile app.

The Chief Electoral Officer, District Election Officers and BLOs have been specifically instructed to ensure that elderly persons, persons with disabilities and other vulnerable groups are not harassed and are given all assistance necessary for inclusion.

A bench comprising Chief Justice of India Surya Kant and Justice Joymalya Bagchi will hear the petitions challenging the West Bengal SIR on December 9,

 Case : Dola Sen v. Election Commission of India and others | WP(c) 1074/2025