As Bihar heads toward assembly elections, the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of the voter list has sparked a heated debate. Opposition parties, particularly the Rashtriya Janata Dal (RJD), have accused the ruling side of conspiring to delete the names of poor voters. Tejashwi Yadav, Leader of Opposition and RJD’s prime face, even launched a Voter Adhikar Yatra to highlight the issue. However, despite his appeals, RJD’s actual participation in the claims and objections process has been minimal. With just two days left before the deadline, the party has submitted only 10 cases.

Tejashwi’s Appeal and Party’s Weak Response

On August 25, Tejashwi Yadav released a video message urging RJD leaders and workers to engage actively in the voter list revision process. He stressed that names wrongly deleted must be restored and eligible new voters added. Despite this appeal, six days later RJD’s tally of claims and objections remains stuck at just 10 cases.

All of these cases relate to adding names, with no recorded objections regarding deletions. This weak participation raises questions about the seriousness of RJD’s ground-level machinery and the effectiveness of Tejashwi’s call.

CPI-ML’s Stronger Role

In contrast, CPI-ML, a smaller ally within the Mahagathbandhan, has been more proactive. The party has filed applications to add 15 names and to remove 103 names from the draft voter list. This participation, though limited in numbers, shows greater initiative compared to RJD’s minimal input.

Meanwhile, ruling parties have not filed objections, which is understandable as they face no accusations of voter suppression. But the opposition, which moved the Supreme Court against alleged voter list tampering, has itself failed to fully utilize the revision process.

The Scale of the Revision Process

The Special Intensive Revision involves 1,60,813 booth-level voter list checks, with participation from 12 national and state-level parties. Across all parties, only 128 claims or objections have been filed so far.

This figure appears insignificant when viewed against allegations of around 65 lakh deletions from the voter list. If opposition parties truly believed such large-scale manipulation occurred, their limited formal submissions weaken their credibility.

From RJD’s side, the timeline shows a slow buildup. By August 28, the party had filed only 3 claims. On August 29, the number rose to 9, and by August 30, it touched 10. As of August 31, the tally has not increased further.

Supreme Court Pressure

The Supreme Court has already expressed concern over opposition inactivity. During the last hearing, the Court questioned parties about their failure to act within the month-long window provided for claims and objections. It also directed that Aadhaar linkage with voter lists be utilized to prevent wrongful deletions.

With the deadline set for September 1, the Court is expected to ask for concrete details in the next hearing. Opposition leaders, including Tejashwi, may have to explain why their parties did not file sufficient cases despite publicly alleging voter suppression.

Voters’ Own Efforts

While political parties have contributed little, individual voters have been more active. By the morning of August 31, citizens themselves filed 33,326 applications to add names and 2,07,565 objections to deletions.

The Election Commission has already resolved 38,342 of these cases. Additionally, 15,32,438 young citizens who turned 18 applied to add their names. Out of these, over 81,000 applications have already been processed.

This contrast between voter action and political inaction further highlights the gap in opposition strategy.

Congress’s Allegations

Congress, another key opposition party, has claimed to have filed 89 lakh complaints regarding deletions. However, the Election Commission maintains that no such records have been officially received. Congress spokesperson Pawan Khera reiterated the allegations in Patna on Sunday, accusing the Commission of ignoring evidence.

The discrepancy between party statements and official records raises doubts about the coordination and seriousness of opposition campaigns.

What Happens After September 1

Once the deadline for claims and objections closes on the evening of September 1, the Election Commission will finalize the draft voter list. At that point, political parties will no longer have the chance to raise formal corrections until the next revision cycle.

For Tejashwi Yadav and RJD, this situation is particularly sensitive. Having conducted statewide campaigns branding the deletions as “vote theft,” their inability to file more than 10 cases under the prescribed process leaves them exposed to criticism.

Political Implications

The issue of voter list revisions could influence the political narrative in the upcoming elections. Allegations of large-scale voter deletions resonate strongly with marginalized communities, especially the poor, who feel targeted. But without documented objections, opposition parties may struggle to convert these concerns into electoral advantage.

For the ruling NDA, the opposition’s weak response offers a defense. They can argue that if the deletions were truly widespread, opposition parties would have formally challenged them.

The Special Intensive Revision of Bihar’s voter list has become a test not only for the Election Commission but also for political parties. Tejashwi Yadav’s repeated claims of a conspiracy to erase poor voters may lose weight if his party fails to act within the official framework.

With the deadline expiring on September 1, RJD stands with only 10 claims filed, while CPI-ML and Congress have taken more visible steps. Voters themselves, however, have shown greater initiative, filing thousands of applications to protect their rights.