Union Home Minister Amit Shah has claimed that around three crore Bangladeshi infiltrators were among the voters categorised as absent during the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls, and the claim has split the political field wide open. He made the remarks in Hyderabad. BJP and NDA leaders have backed him, while Congress and Samajwadi Party leaders are demanding proof.

Shah spoke at the BJP’s ‘Loktantra Bachao, Arajakta Hatao’ march in Hyderabad. The march was part of the party’s nationwide campaign against the INDIA Bloc’s opposition to the alleged irregularities in the SIR exercise and its criticism of Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar. He accused the Congress and its allies of trying to protect Bangladeshi infiltrators by opposing the electoral roll revision. He also called the INDIA bloc’s rally in Delhi on Sunday a ‘Save the Infiltrators Rally’.

Shah also rejected Rahul Gandhi’s allegation that names of 13 crore voters had been deleted during the SIR process. According to Shah, those figures included approximately 6.25 crore voters who had shifted residences, around three crore deceased voters and nearly one crore duplicate entries. Separately, he claimed that three crore Bangladeshi infiltrators had been categorised as absent. That second claim is the one now dominating the argument.

The BJP digs in

BJP Jharkhand spokesperson Pratul Shah Deo defended the Home Minister’s statement and said illegal immigration had significantly altered the demographic composition of certain regions, particularly Jharkhand. Speaking to IANS, he said the last Census was conducted in 2011 and claimed that substantial demographic changes had been recorded over the decades. He accused the Congress, which had been in power at the Centre for several years, of allowing Bangladeshi infiltrators and Rohingyas to enter the country illegally.

Deo also alleged that leaders of the Jharkhand Mukti Morcha (JMM) had welcomed infiltrators to secure electoral support. He claimed illegal immigrants had obtained Aadhaar and voter identity cards with the help of state authorities. To back his argument, he cited figures for the Santhal tribal community, whose share of Jharkhand’s population he said had declined from 44 per cent in 1951 to 28 per cent in 2011. In the same period, he said, the Muslim population had risen from 9 per cent to 23 per cent. He questioned why the JMM was opposing the issue being raised.

Shiv Sena leader Shaina NC also backed the BJP’s position. She claimed the three crore names referred to by Shah were not genuine voters but infiltrators. She accused the INDIA Bloc of protecting illegal immigrants under the pretext of opposing the SIR exercise, and said its campaign should be called a ‘Ghuspethiya Bachao Yatra’ rather than a ‘Vote Bachao Yatra’. She also pressed Rahul Gandhi on his stand. "Why are you scared of SIR? Why are you scared of a real debate? If you are not wrong, then why are you scared?" she asked.

Telangana gets pulled into the row

The row has a direct Telangana angle. Shaina NC referred to Telangana Chief Minister Revanth Reddy’s alleged acknowledgement of the presence of infiltrators in Hyderabad, and used it to question Congress’s position on the issue. The claim has not been independently confirmed in the material available. But because Shah made his remarks in Hyderabad, the infiltration debate is now being argued on Telangana’s home ground, and the state government is part of the political exchange.

BJP National Spokesperson Guru Prakash said the public had a right to know who the people categorised as absent or untraceable were. "We need to understand who these three crore people are who are untraceable and absent. Why were they listed in the electoral roll till now? The nation has the right to know," he said. He added that anyone entering India illegally without valid documentation should be investigated, and said the country’s resources rightfully belonged to its citizens.

Opposition demands the list

Congress leader Udit Raj challenged the Home Minister to back his claim with documents. He demanded that the records be made public and the list digitised. He also asked how many infiltrators had actually been found in Jharkhand, Delhi and Bihar, states where similar allegations had been raised.

If you are claiming that three crore people are there, then show the record; digitise the list.

Raj went further, questioning why the Centre had failed to identify and deport alleged infiltrators despite being in power for nearly 12-and-a-half years. He alleged that nearly one lakh infiltrators had been ousted during Dr Manmohan Singh’s rule, and said the current government could not even find 3,000. He said the leaders making such claims should resign. "All of them are liars," he alleged.

Congress leader Tewari demanded that Shah disclose the identities and nationalities of those he had described as infiltrators. "If the Home Minister is claiming that out of the 13 crore names removed from the voter list, three crore belong to infiltrators, then he should make the list of those people public. He should also disclose which countries these people infiltrated from before entering India," Tewari said.

He argued that if infiltration had occurred on such a large scale, it would raise serious questions about the Union Home Ministry, which is responsible for internal security and border management. "If infiltration has occurred, then it is the biggest shortcoming of the Home Ministry," he said.

Samajwadi Party MP Awadhesh Prasad questioned whether Shah had accurate information about who qualified as an infiltrator. He said many people had fought for the country’s freedom and many had ancestors buried in India. He argued that the Home Minister did not seem to understand who the real patriots were, and who the actual infiltrators were.

What is still unproven

The core dispute comes down to a single number that neither side has put on the table in full. Shah says three crore of the voters categorised as absent were Bangladeshi infiltrators. Opposition leaders say no list has been published. BJP leaders say the public has a right to see the names, and that the names should be investigated. Both sides are using the same figure to argue opposite points.

For now, the claim remains a political assertion. The demand for documentary evidence has not been met in the material available. Whether the records are released, and what they show, will decide whether this becomes a turning point in the SIR debate or another round of charges and counter-charges.