As of October 13, 2025, not a single appeal has been filed against the inclusion or exclusion of any person in Bihar's final electoral roll, which was published on September 30, 2025. This announcement was made by the state's Chief Electoral Officer (CEO) in a social media update.
The Bihar CEO posted on X that, up to October 12, 2025, District Magistrates had not received any appeals under Section 24(a) of the Representation of the People Act regarding the Electoral Registration Officer's (ERO) decisions on additions or deletions of names during the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) across Bihar's 243 assembly constituencies.
Section 24(a) of the Representation of the People Act of 1950 allows for a two-stage appeal process against an ERO's decision. The first appeal can be made to the District Magistrate. If the appellant is not satisfied with the District Magistrate's ruling, they can file a second and final appeal with the CEO. To file an appeal under this section, the person needs to be an elector in that constituency. If the person is not an elector, they may be asked to file an affidavit affirming that they believe their claims of wrongful exclusion or inclusion to be true.
The Special Intensive Revision (SIR) involved publishing draft electoral rolls on August 1, 2025, after collecting enumeration forms from eligible electors. During this process, approximately 6.5 million names were identified for deletion because of death, migration, or multiple registrations, and 2.153 million new names were added. Following the revision, the electoral roll comprised approximately 74.2 million voters.
The Association for Democratic Reforms (ADR) has petitioned the Supreme Court, claiming inconsistencies of SIR 2025 with earlier rules and unfairly shifting proof burdens onto voters. The Supreme Court has directed the Election Commission of India (ECI) to furnish details on 366,000 names excluded from the final roll and whether those exclusions are justified. The Supreme Court has also directed the Bihar State Legal Services Authority to ensure district-level bodies help affected individuals file appeals.
Election Commission officials have stated that the CEO's post was meant to underline that no elector had formally challenged the revision before local authorities. According to an EC official, the lack of appeals questions the claims of wrongful additions and deletions from the final roll. The Election Commission maintains that the SIR was conducted strictly according to the Representation of the People Act and related rules, with deletions based only on verified grounds such as duplication, migration, or death, and new additions comprising mostly first-time voters.
