SIR of electoral rolls begins in 12 states, UTs; TMC calls exercise a 'con job'
New Delhi (PTI): Election Commission's Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of voters' list commenced in nine states and three Union territories on Tuesday with the TMC dubbing the exercise as a "con job" by the "compromised" poll body.
The electoral roll cleanup exercise is also being opposed by the ruling DMK and its allies in Tamil Nadu.
The Election Commission (EC) said its booth-level officers (BLOs) have fanned out to hand over semi-filled enumeration forms to electors and will also help them fill the required document.
According to the schedule announced by the poll authority, SIR will begin with the enumeration stage and continue till December 4.
ALSO READ: ECI team to visit Bengal to review SIR procedures: Official
The EC will release the draft electoral rolls on December 9, and the final electoral rolls will be published on February 7.
The 12 states and UTs where the second round of SIR will be conducted are the Andaman and Nicobar Islands, Lakshadweep, Chhattisgarh, Goa, Gujarat, Kerala, Madhya Pradesh, Puducherry, Rajasthan, Tamil Nadu, Uttar Pradesh and West Bengal.
Among these, Tamil Nadu, Puducherry, Kerala and West Bengal will go to polls in 2026. In Assam, another state where polls are due in 2026, the revision of electoral rolls will be announced separately as a Supreme Court-supervised exercise to verify citizenship is underway in the state.
Also, a separate provision of the Citizenship Act was applicable to Assam.
After Bihar, this is the second round of SIR. The state's final voter list with nearly 7.42 crore names was published on September 30.
ALSO READ: SIR begins in Uttar Pradesh; BLOs to visit households with forms
The SIR began in West Bengal amid soaring political temperatures over the exercise in the state.
The exercise turned into a political battleground, pitting the BJP's clout and the poll body's push for "transparency" against the Trinamool Congress' grassroots resistance ahead of the 2026 assembly polls.
While the BJP has welcomed the SIR as a step towards ensuring greater transparency in the electoral rolls, the ruling TMC has questioned its timing and intent, alleging that the EC is acting under pressure from the saffron party to manipulate the voter list ahead of the state elections next year.
With both parties treating the SIR as a prelude to the 2026 assembly elections, the contest has morphed into what many in political circles describe as "the battle of two forces, the administrative and the organisational".
TMC leader Derek O'Brien termed the SIR exercise a "con job organised by the Extremely Compromised body".
Separately, the DMK, in its plea before the Supreme Court against the SIR, has dubbed it a "de facto NRC" and has challenged its constitutional validity. The ruling party in Tamil Nadu has sought the quashing of the EC's notification on SIR dated October 27, 2025.
However, the main opposition, AIADMK, an ally of the BJP, supports the exercise.
In Uttar Pradesh, the exercise was launched under the theme 'Shuddh Nirvachak Namavali – Majboot Loktantra' (Clean Electoral Roll – Strong Democracy).
Let the Truth be known. If you read VB and like VB, please be a VB Supporter and Help us deliver the Truth to one and all.
Deep societal faultlines persist despite 75 years of independence: Justice Ujjal Bhuyan
Judge cites denial of home to Muslim girl, opposition to Dalit women cooking mid-day meals
Hyderabad, February 23, 2026: Supreme Court judge Justice Ujjal Bhuyan has said that despite repeated affirmations of constitutional morality by courts, deep societal faultlines rooted in caste and religious discrimination continue to shape everyday realities in India.
Speaking at a seminar on “Constitutional Morality and the Role of District Judiciary” organised by the Telangana Judges Association and the Telangana State Judicial Academy in Hyderabad, Justice Bhuyan reflected on the gap between constitutional ideals and social practices.
He cited a recent instance involving his daughter’s friend, a PhD scholar at a private university in Noida, who was denied accommodation in South Delhi after her surname revealed her Muslim identity. According to Justice Bhuyan, the landlady bluntly informed her that no accommodation was available once her religious background became known.
In another example from Odisha, he referred to resistance by some parents to the government’s mid-day meal programme because the food was prepared by Dalit women employed as cooks. He noted that some parents had objected aggressively and refused to allow their children to consume meals cooked by members of the Scheduled Caste community.
Describing these incidents as “the tip of the iceberg,” Justice Bhuyan said they reveal how far society remains from the benchmark of constitutional morality even 75 years into the Republic. He observed that while the Constitution lays down standards of equality and dignity, the morality practised within homes and communities often diverges sharply from those values.
He emphasised that constitutional morality requires governance through the rule of law rather than the rule of popular opinion. Referring to the evolution of the doctrine through judicial decisions, he cited Naz Foundation v Union of India, in which the Delhi High Court read down Section 377 of the Indian Penal Code, holding that popular morality cannot restrict fundamental rights under Article 21. Though the judgment was later overturned in Suresh Kumar Koushal v Naz Foundation, the Supreme Court ultimately restored and expanded the principle in Navtej Singh Johar v Union of India, affirming that constitutional morality must prevail over majoritarian views.
“In our constitutional scheme, it is the constitutionality of the issue before the court that is relevant, not the dominant or popular view,” he said.
Justice Bhuyan also addressed the functioning of the district judiciary, underlining that trial courts are the first point of contact for most litigants and form the foundation of the justice delivery system. He stressed that due importance must be given to the recording of evidence and adjudication of bail matters.
Highlighting the role of High Courts, he said their supervisory jurisdiction under Article 227 of the Constitution is intended as a shield to correct grave jurisdictional errors, not as a mechanism to substitute the discretion or factual appreciation of trial judges.
He recalled that several distinguished judges, including Justice H R Khanna, Justice A M Ahmadi, and Justice Fathima Beevi, began their careers in the district judiciary.
On representation within the judicial system, Justice Bhuyan noted that Telangana has made significant strides in gender inclusion. Out of a sanctioned strength of 655 judicial officers in the Telangana Judicial Service, 478 are currently serving, of whom 283 are women, exceeding 50 per cent representation. He added that members of Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes, minority communities, and persons with disabilities are also represented in the state’s judiciary.
He observed that greater representation of women, marginalised communities, persons with disabilities, and sexual minorities would help make the judiciary more inclusive and reflective of India’s diversity. “The judiciary must represent all the colours of the rainbow and become a rainbow institution,” he said.
Justice Bhuyan also referred to the recent restoration by the Supreme Court of the requirement of a minimum three years of practice at the Bar for entry-level judicial posts. While acknowledging that the requirement ensures practical exposure, he cautioned that its impact on women aspirants, especially those from rural or small-town backgrounds facing social and financial constraints, would need to be carefully observed over time.
Concluding his address, he reiterated that the justice system must strive to bridge the gap between constitutional ideals and lived realities, ensuring that the rule of law remains paramount.
