SC lawyer Prashant Bhushan warns SIR deletions could dilute citizens’ rights

Senior advocate Prashant Bhushan and activist Yogendra Yadav have raised concerns over the deletion of nearly 91 lakh names from West Bengal’s electoral rolls under the Special Intensive Revision exercise. They warned that the move could extend beyond voting rights, potentially affecting identity-linked entitlements such as Aadhaar.

Kolkata: Senior Supreme Court lawyer Prashant Bhushan on Sunday expressed alarm over large-scale deletion of names under the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls in West Bengal, saying those affected by it may see their “other rights diluted or withdrawn”.

Backing his apprehensions expressed at a press conference here, political activist Yogendra Yadav warned that the removal of the names of lakhs of voters through the SIR exercise may extend beyond electoral disenfranchisement and impact other identity-linked rights.

---

Those excluded from electoral rolls could be the first to face scrutiny in other identification systems, he claimed.

“Today, it is the voters’ list. Tomorrow, questions may be raised about the authenticity of identity documents like Aadhaar. Those already struck off the rolls could be the earliest to be affected,” Yadav said.

Nearly 91 lakh voters have been deleted from the electoral rolls in West Bengal following the Special Intensive Revision exercise in the state, according to data released by the Election Commission.

The poll panel is yet to officially announce the final voter base for the state after the roll revision process. From the available figures, however, the total deletion in the state at this point, based on the 7.66 crore electors identified at the end of October last year, stands at over 11.85 per cent.

Backing Yadav’s concerns, Bhushan alleged the developments indicate a broader attempt at disenfranchisement, while stressing that the right to vote is foundational to all other democratic entitlements.

“If the right to vote is taken away, it opens the door for other rights to be diluted or withdrawn. What we are witnessing is not an isolated exercise but something that could fundamentally alter the relationship between citizens and the state,” he said.

The senior advocate further claimed that earlier attempts to reconfigure citizenship frameworks had not yielded the desired outcome, and alternative mechanisms were now being employed.

“Constitutional guarantees cannot be easily amended, but indirect routes appear to be in play to achieve similar ends,” he claimed.

Economist Parakala Prabhakar, taking a longer-term view of the matter, said the implications of the revision process could go beyond immediate electoral outcomes and reshape the very nature of citizenship in the country.

“There is a risk that India may gradually be divided into two distinct categories — those who retain voting rights and those who are effectively excluded. Such a shift would strike at the core of universal adult franchise,” he said.

The trio’s remarks come ahead of hearings in the Supreme Court of India, expected early next week, on petitions challenging the SIR of electoral rolls.

Citing data, Yadav questioned the rationale behind the deletions, noting that West Bengal’s electoral rolls had earlier shown near parity with its adult population.

He also pointed to “anomalies” in the process, claiming that while other states witnessed an increase in voter numbers between draft and final rolls, West Bengal stood out as an exception.

“This divergence suggests that something unusual has occurred here,” Yadav said.

Alleging targeted exclusion, Yadav said that post-verification deletions appeared to have disproportionately affected certain communities.

He cited constituency-level examples to argue that the pattern of removals was not random. “If such disproportionate figures do not indicate targeted action, it is difficult to explain what does,” he remarked.

Prabhakar described the upcoming hearing as a crucial moment. “The judiciary now has an opportunity to reaffirm and protect the foundational principles of the Constitution,” he said.