Rare 'intensive' revision in Bihar four months before polls

New Delhi: The Election Commission's 'Special Intensive Revision' of Bihar's electoral rolls has sparked a major political debate. However, this is not the first time that the poll panel has ordered an 'intensive' revision of electoral rolls -- at least nine such revisions were held from 1952 to 2004, several of which came with similar house-to-house verification and even a 'de novo' electoral roll in some cases. However, the EC has seldom ordered a full state intensive revision in a state 4-6 months ahead of assembly elections, as is the case with Bihar.

Factor the last such instances: In June 2004, ECI ordered 'Intensive Revision of Electoral Rolls' in seven northeastern states and J&K.

Alongside, it ordered a 'special summary revision' in Andhra Pradesh, Bihar, Chhattisgarh, Goa, Gujarat, Haryana, Himachal Pradesh, Jharkhand, Karnataka, Kerala, Madhya Pradesh, Maharashtra, Orissa, Punjab, Rajasthan, Sikkim, Tamil Nadu, Uttar Pradesh, Uttaranchal, West Bengal, and Union Territories of Andaman & Nicobar Islands, Chandigarh, Daman & Diu, Dadra & Nagar Haveli, NCT of Delhi, Lakshadweep and Pondicherry.Prior to that, 'intensive revision' of the electoral rolls was conducted in 20 other states/UTs, including Bihar, in two phases during 2002 and 2003, except the northeastern states and J&K.

BIHAR 2025- A unique case
The 2025 SIR in Bihar is different on several counts. While an 'intensive' revision mostly involves a 'de novo' exercise, drawing up a fresh electoral roll from the scratch, the Bihar SIR is using the 2002-03 electoral roll as a base to build upon. At the same time, it involves a new pre-printed enumeration form included in the usual house-to-house verification format and document submission, associated with an 'intensive' revision. It is, also, very different from previous intensive revision exercises in terms of timing.

EC has seldom ordered a full state and full-scale intensive revision in a state 4-6 months ahead of scheduled assembly elections, as is the case with Bihar. Bihar saw its last intensive revision in 2002, a good three years away from the assembly polls held in October 2005.

Similarly, when the EC, on June 29, 2004 announced an intensive roll revision in eight states, it chose to leave out two states which were pending a similar intensive roll revision. These were Arunachal Pradesh & Maharashtra where assembly polls were due in October 2004.

"In Arunachal Pradesh and Maharashtra, general elections to the assemblies are to be held in the latter half of 2004. Therefore, the programme in these two states will be announced after the completion of the elections," the EC press note on 29.06.2004 read.

Instead, a 'special summary revision of rolls' was announced for Maharashtra ahead of the October 2024 assembly polls with house-to-house enumeration, as per the September-December 2004 EC newsletter.

The EC has, in fact, often conducted 'intensive' revision in certain areas of a state. In Tamil Nadu- after inquiry reports indicated 'shortcomings in the conduct of different levels of election officers at the time of intensive revision of electoral rolls in 2002'- the poll panel on October 19, 2004 ordered a 'special revision of intensive nature with house-to-house enumeration' in six municipal corporation areas across 33 constituencies, spanning parts of Chennai, Salem, Coimbatore, Tiruchirappalli, Madurai, and Tirunelveli.

In the aftermath of Gujarat riots, the ECI on August 16,2002, announced a repeat of the 2002 'special revision of intensive nature'.

Types Of Electoral Roll Revisions

Intensive Revision: It’s usually a de-novo process without reference to earlier existing roll; involves at least 2 household verification visits by booth-level officer

Summary Revision: Roll is simply updated; no house-to-house enumeration but objections are addressed before final roll publication

Special Summary Revision: EC can order so if it finds inaccuracies or poor coverage of any area. EC can adopt changes in existing procedure

Partly Intensive and Partly Summary Revision: Existing electoral rolls are published in draft and checked through household verification and put through claims/objection process

Roll revision chronology

1950
Originally Section 23 of Representation of the People Act, 1950 provided for annual revision with March 1 as qualifying date

1952
After first gen election in 1952, EC directed that from 1952 to 1956, annual revision of electoral rolls should cover 1/5th of entire state area so that every locality might have its electoral roll intensively revised at least once before 2nd gen polls

1956
EC directed intensive revision of rolls every year in some areas where electoral rolls were likely to become inaccurate: (i) Urban Areas (ii) Areas with floating labour population (iii) Areas where fairly large movements of population had taken place

1957
Post 1957: Lok Sabha polls: EC directed that during each of the three following years, the electoral rolls of 1/3rd of the entire state area be revised intensively, while during 1961 the revision would be intensive only in urban areas, areas with floating, migratory population and service voters

1960
Following amendments to RP Act, 1950, EC ordered annual revision of rolls between January 1 and Jan 31 of the year

1962
Post 1962 LS Polls: EC directed ‘summary revision’ adequate for 1963 and 1964. In 1965 intensive revision conducted again in 40% of the country; the rest 60% was done in 1966

1966
Post 1966: District Election Officer appointed in each district and summary roll revision conducted in 1969-70 and 1975

1976
Emergency: no Lok Sabha polls in 1976; EC held summary roll revision

1983
1983 on: Staggered intensive revision of all rural constituencies ahead of 1985 LS polls

1987-88
All constituencies revised intensively; special revision in 1989

1992
Summary revision ordered followed by intensive revision in 1993 along with introduction of EPIC card

1995
Intensive Revision comes in

1999-2000
Amid computerisation electoral rolls, no intensive revision in 1999, 2000

2002
Special intensive revision in 20 states; intensive revision in 7 states in 2003-04