On 27 May 2026, the Supreme Court upheld the validity of the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) conducted by the Election Commission of India, holding it consistent with the Representation of the People Act, 1950 [1][2]. The Court’s reasoning rested on the accuracy of the electoral roll, not on voter turnout [2]. It has been suggested that SIR and voter turnout are linked, with the SIR as one reason for record turnout in states like Bihar and West Bengal [3][4]. That raises a question: does a cleaner register bring more people to the booth? The evidence shows that a record turnout cannot be taken as proof that a cleaner roll raises participation. The rise in votes cast in Bihar cannot be attributed to a cleaner roll alone, while the rise in Bengal’s turnout rate largely reflects a smaller electoral roll.
Start with the arithmetic of turnout. It is simply the number of people who cast their vote divided by the number of people on the roll. An SIR that deletes dead, duplicate and departed names and adds eligible new voters will therefore change turnout automatically, even if the number of votes cast stays the same. Bihar’s roll went from 7.89 crore to 7.24 crore at the draft stage and finally to 7.42 crore, after 3.66 lakh removals and 21.53 lakh additions [5]. In West Bengal, the electors on the roll fell from 7.66 crore to 6.81 crore, a deletion of around 12 per cent of the roll [6][7]. A shrinking denominator is often mistaken for more people coming out to vote. Real mobilisation would require either that people missing from the list were added and so could vote, or that people already on the list felt more confident that their vote would count. However, Bihar’s votes rose about 19 per cent (calculated) on a roll that grew only about 1 per cent (calculated) [8][9], whereas Bengal’s votes rose around 5.7 per cent (calculated) on a roll that shrank about 7 per cent (calculated) [6][13]. The rising number of voters and the shrinking roll are separate effects, and India’s data can only partly tell them apart.
Bihar case study: SIR and voter turnout
In 2025, Bihar recorded the highest turnout in the history of the state [3]. The SIR left about 65 lakh electors off the 1 August 2025 draft roll [2, para 10.9], which tempts one to conclude that a smaller roll produced a higher turnout. But the figures show about 78 lakh more votes were cast in 2025 than in 2020 [8][9].
Compared with the 2020 roll, the number of electors rose by a mere 1 per cent, from 7.36 crore (2020) to 7.45 crore (2025) [8][9]. The two rolls are nearly the same size. About 4.2 crore votes were cast in 2020 (57.29 per cent of 7.36 crore electors) and about 5 crore in 2025 (about 67 per cent of 7.45 crore electors), roughly 19 per cent more votes [8][9]. Had the SIR deleted no elector, dividing 5 crore votes by the pre-SIR electorate of 7.9 crore would give a turnout of around 63 per cent, still six points higher than in 2020 (calculated). A shrinking roll cannot, therefore, be the whole explanation for Bihar’s rise.
Votes rose sharply even though the roll barely changed, which suggests that more factors were at play than a cleaner roll. One possible factor is that the 2020 poll took place during the pandemic, which may have lowered the base. Another is the promise of cash transfers under schemes such as the Mukhyamantri Mahila Rozgar Yojana, which could have helped mobilise women and economically weaker sections [10]. A third is the entry of new political formations such as Jan Suraaj under Prashant Kishor, which could possibly have drawn in non-traditional voters.
West Bengal case study
West Bengal saw a turnout of 93.71 per cent in 2026, 11.41 points above the 2021 figure [6][7][13]. The Election Commission does not record the reason for this high turnout. Analysts such as Ronojoy Sen have reported on-ground fear of deletions and migrants travelling home to vote [11]. However, there is no official count of migrants returning, or any measure of how far fear affected turnout.
In contrast to the leap in the turnout rate, the number of people who voted rose from 6.04 crore in 2021 to 6.38 crore in 2026, around 5.7 per cent (calculated) [6][7][13]. The number of electors rose from 7.34 crore in 2021 to 7.66 crore before the SIR, then fell to 6.81 crore in 2026, a net fall of about 85 lakh after the SIR removed names from the pre-SIR list of 7.66 crore [6][7][13]. Names were also added after these deletions. The deletions formed about 12 per cent of the roll (calculated). Had the SIR deleted no elector, dividing the 2026 votes by the pre-SIR electorate of 7.66 crore would give a turnout of 83.3 per cent, only one point above the 2021 figure of 82.3 per cent (calculated). The smaller roll therefore explains most of the rise in Bengal’s turnout rate.
Side by side, Bihar’s votes rose about 19 per cent (calculated) with a near-flat roll, while Bengal’s rose around 5.7 per cent (calculated) with a shrinking roll [6][8][9][13]. The same policy produced different combinations of arithmetic and behaviour. A record turnout cannot, therefore, be taken as proof that a cleaner roll raises participation.
Supporters of the SIR argue, however, that turnout is really about how many eligible electors vote, and that a roll full of dead, departed and duplicate electors keeps the figures far from reality. This upholds the constitutional mandate of free and fair elections [2, para 54]. On this view the cleanup did more than update the roll: it corrected an inflated base and produced an honest measure of turnout. They suggest that a verified roll may also raise voter confidence, by making people believe that their vote will count and will not be taken by ghost voters. They point to the rise in votes in both Bihar (19 per cent, calculated) and Bengal (around 5.7 per cent, calculated), where the SIR took place [6][8][9][13].
The SIR and its corrections were necessary and valuable, and one cannot call Bengal’s 93.71 per cent turnout flawed [6]. It merely shows that the old rate was inaccurate, not that voters suddenly changed their behaviour because of the SIR. The rise in Bihar, too, is most likely the result of other factors and cannot be attributed to a cleaner roll.
There is also a real and serious risk of disenfranchisement. The Supreme Court states that the franchise depends on including the eligible and excluding the ineligible, and that wrongful exclusion of a voter is as damaging as wrongful inclusion [2, para 91]. Wrongful inclusion can be fixed through the deletion process, but wrongful exclusion removes the right until the person claims it back [2, para 67, 10.5]. The Court found no widespread disenfranchisement in Bihar [2, para 95], but the position in West Bengal remains highly contested. Petitioners have claimed that the number of deleted voters exceeded the victory margins in certain seats. The matter is sub judice [12].
The Commission can take certain measures to restore trust and make the process more transparent and accountable. It should publish turnout against both the pre-SIR and post-SIR rolls, along with absolute votes, for each constituency. It should track the enrolment of eligible electors and not only the number of deletions, as with the 21.53 lakh additions in Bihar [2, para 10.14]. And it should report how many deleted names were restored after appeal and how long the process took. In the end, the register is only a means. Its power to affect turnout depends entirely on eligible electors finding their names on it, believing in it, and having a reason to come out and vote.
Citations
[1] Representation of the People Act, 1950 (Act 43 of 1950), s. 21(3).
[2] Association for Democratic Reforms v. Election Commission of India, W.P.(C) No. 640 of 2025, 2026 INSC 564 (Supreme Court of India, 27 May 2026).
[3] Election Commission of India, press note No. ECI/PN/351/2025 (11 November 2025): 66.91% voter turnout overall, highest since the first Bihar elections in 1951.
[4] Election Commission of India, press note No. ECI/PN/080/2026 (29 April 2026): West Bengal records highest-ever poll participation, 91.66% in Phase II.
[5] Election Commission of India, press note No. ECI/PN/313/2025 (30 September 2025): Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of Electoral Rolls in Bihar successfully completed.
[6] Election Commission of India, Statistical Report, General Election to the Legislative Assembly of West Bengal 2026.
[7] Chief Electoral Officer, West Bengal, Press Note No. CEO/PN-05/2026 (28 February 2026).
[8] Election Commission of India, Statistical Report, State Election 2020 to the Legislative Assembly of Bihar.
[9] Election Commission of India, Statistical Report, State Election 2025 to the Legislative Assembly of Bihar.
[10] Press Information Bureau, PM to launch Bihar’s Mukhyamantri Mahila Rojgar Yojana on September 26.
[11] Ronojoy Sen, ISAS Brief (28 April 2026), West Bengal assembly election: record turnout sets stage for second phase.
[12] Mostari Banu v. The Election Commission of India, W.P.(C) No. 1089/2025 (Supreme Court of India, 22 September 2026).
[13] Election Commission of India, Statistical Report, General Election to the Legislative Assembly of West Bengal 2021.
Frequently asked questions
Did the SIR raise voter turnout in Bihar?
Not on its own. Votes cast rose about 19 per cent on a roll that grew only about 1 per cent, so the rise cannot be attributed to a cleaner roll alone.
Why did West Bengal’s turnout rate jump?
Turnout was 93.71 per cent in 2026, 11.41 points above 2021, but votes rose only about 5.7 per cent while the roll shrank about 7 per cent. The smaller roll explains most of the rise in the rate.
How does a smaller roll change turnout?
Turnout is votes cast divided by electors on the roll, so deleting dead, duplicate and departed names raises the rate even if the number of votes stays the same.
What does the article ask the Election Commission to publish?
Turnout against both the pre-SIR and post-SIR rolls with absolute votes for each constituency, enrolment of eligible electors, and the number of deleted names restored after appeal.
Further reading from AFPR: Counting the Counters: SIR Across the States, Phase by Phase
