The Election Commission of India (ECI) has apprised the Supreme Court that it was not obliged under the applicable Rules to publish a separate list of persons, who were not included in the draft electoral roll, during the ongoing Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls in Bihar.
Citing Rules 10 and 11 of the Registration of Electors Rules, 1960, the Commission contended that the statutory framework did not require the Commission to prepare or share any separate list of names of people not included in the draft electoral rolls, or publish the reasons for non-inclusion of anyone in the draft electoral rolls for any reason.
Even though there was no statutory obligation, the ECI shared with political parties the booth-level list of individuals whose Enumeration Forms were not received due to any reason and sought their assistance in reaching out to those persons, it noted, adding that all attempts were made to reach out to these individuals and ensure that no eligible elector was left out. This was publicised as per a press note published on July 20.
The ECI made these submissions in a counter-affidavit submitted in reply to an application filed by the Association for Democratic Reforms (ADR), seeking directions for the publication of a separate list of excluded individuals and the disclosure of reasons for their exclusion.
The Commission opposed the plea on the grounds that such measures were not required under the Rules.
Neither the law nor the guidelines provided for preparation or sharing of any such list of previous electors whose enumeration form was not received for any reason during the Enumeration phase, mandated publication of such list. No such list could be sought by the petition as a matter of right, it noted.
Persons who did not figure in the draft electoral roll published on August 1, 2025, could submit an application under Form 6 along with the Declaration contained in Annexure-D of the SIR Order to lodge a claim for inclusion in the draft roll during the claims and objections period, between August 1, 2025 to September 1, 2025.
Drawn by Advocate Eklavya Dwivedi and Kumar Utsav, the counter-affidavit noted that when a person submitted such a form, it implied that such a person ilwas neither dead, nor migrated, nor untraceable.
Providing reasons for non-inclusion, along with the list of names, would serve no practical purpose as the exercise for all three aforestated categories of persons (dead, permanently shifted or untraceable) remained the same. The petitioner’s assertion that without availability of reasons, the individuals whose names were excluded from the draft roll would not be able to seek appropriate recourse under the RER 1960, was false, misconceived, and unsustainable, it added.
ADR filed the petition in the wake of publication of draft voters list by the ssion on August 1, which reportedly excluded about 65 lakh voters in Bihar. The petitioner sought directions to the ECI to publish a full and final assembly constituency and part/booth wise list of names and details of approximately 65 lakh electors whose Enumeration Forms were not submitted along with reasons for non-submission (Death, Permanently Shifted, duplicate, untraceable etc).
It further sought publication of another list by the Commission, based on assembly constituency and party/booth of the Draft Electoral Rolls published on August 1, 2025, whose Enumeration Forms have been marked not recommended by the BLOs.
The Commission submitted that the exclusion of a name from the draft electoral roll did not amount to deletion of an individual from the electoral rolls. The draft roll simply showed that the duly filled enumeration form of existing electors has been received during the Enumeration Phase. On account of human involvement in the execution of this exercise of scale, however, there was always a possibility that an exclusion or inclusion might surface due to inadvertence or error. Therefore, the Rules provided the remedy under Rule 21 for submitting an application for inclusion in the list. It was for this reason that the issuance of reasons for exclusion of names from the draft rolls was not contemplated in the statutory framework governing the preparation of electoral rolls, it added.
The information regarding those whose names were missing in draft electoral rolls was in public domain, it said, adding that the ADR filed the present application with unclean hands. The NGO’s approach was similar to its earlier attempts to malign the ECI by building false narratives on digital, print and social media, it added and urged the Court to appropriately deal with the petitioner by imposing heavy costs.