New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Thursday raised tough questions about the Election Commission of India’s (ECI) decision to initiate a Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls in Bihar just months ahead of the state elections. However, citing practical and legal grounds, the court refused to halt the ongoing revision.
A bench of Justices Sudhanshu Dhulia and Joymalya Bagchi heard a batch of petitions filed by opposition leaders and civil society groups, who questioned the timing and intent behind the revision exercise. The court fixed July 28 for the next hearing and gave the Election Commission time till July 21 to file its response.
“If you are to check citizenship under the SIR of electoral rolls in Bihar, then you should have acted early; it is a bit late,” said Justice Dhulia, adding that the exercise “goes to the root of democracy and the power to vote.”
Despite the sharp observations, the bench declined to issue an interim stay, saying that revising electoral rolls is a constitutional obligation of the poll panel. The last such exercise in Bihar was done in 2003, the court noted.
The Election Commission, represented by senior counsel Rakesh Dwivedi, defended its actions, stating the SIR is necessary to ensure the integrity of the electoral process by updating records to include eligible voters and remove ineligible ones. Dwivedi argued:
“If the Election Commission doesn’t have the power to revise the electoral roll, then who does?”
He also clarified that no deletions will be made without due process, and that Aadhaar is not used as proof of citizenship — a point consistent with previous court rulings. Article 326 of the Constitution restricts voting rights to Indian citizens only, he emphasized.
The bench suggested that the EC consider including Aadhaar, voter ID, and ration cards as valid documents for enumeration under the SIR, noting that citizenship determination ultimately falls under the Ministry of Home Affairs, not the Election Commission.
Over ten petitions have been filed in the matter. Prominent petitioners include:
- RJD’s Manoj Jha
- TMC’s Mahua Moitra
- Congress’ K C Venugopal
- NCP (SP)’s Supriya Sule
- CPI’s D Raja
- SP’s Harinder Singh Malik
- Shiv Sena (UBT)’s Arvind Sawant
- JMM’s Sarfraz Ahmed
- CPI (ML)’s Dipankar Bhattacharya
- NGO Association for Democratic Reforms (ADR)
The petitioners have alleged that the SIR process risks disenfranchising vulnerable groups, particularly the poor and marginalized, who may be unable to meet stringent document requirements under the current system.
As the case progresses, the Supreme Court’s final verdict could set a critical precedent for how voter lists are maintained and revised in India, especially in election-bound states.