The Supreme Court is hearing a batch of petitions challenging the Election Commission of India’s June 24 directive for a Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls in Bihar.

A Bench of Justices Surya Kant and Joymalya Bagchi is hearing the matter.

The petitioners have raised concerns that the SIR process permits arbitrary deletion of voters without adequate safeguards, potentially disenfranchising lakhs of citizens and undermining free and fair elections.

The Election Commission has defended its directive, asserting that it is empowered to undertake such an exercise under Article 324 of the Constitution and Section 21(3) of the Representation of the People Act, 1950.

It has maintained that the revision was necessary in light of urban migration, demographic shifts, and long-standing concerns about the accuracy of existing rolls, which had not been intensively revised in nearly twenty years.

The Commission has further submitted that the SIR is crucial to ensure that only eligible citizens are included in the electoral rolls ahead of the upcoming Bihar Assembly elections.

One of the issues that the Court is considering has been the list of documents that may be accepted by the Election Commission to verify the identity of voters to retain their names in the electoral list.

On July 10, the top court had urged the Election Commission to consider Aadhaar, ration card and electoral photo identity card (EPIC card) as admissible documents for this verification exercise.

The Commission, however, later submitted an affidavit stating that neither Aadhaar cards nor ration cards can be treated as proof of eligibility to vote.

The petitioners have challenged the exclusion of these documents as absurd.

The petitioners include opposition leaders from various States, and organizations such as the Association for Democratic Reforms (ADR), the People's Union for Civil Liberties, and the National Federation for Indian Women.

More recently, the ADR filed an interim application urging the Court to direct the ECI to disclose details of 65 lakh names recently dropped from a Bihar electoral roll published on August 1 as part of the SIR.

The ECI responded by stating that there was no legal requirement for it to disclose such reasons for publish a separate list of excluded voters.

It, however, added that no name will be struck off from Bihar’s draft electoral roll without prior notice, an opportunity to be heard and a reasoned order from the competent authority.

On August 12, the Court orally observed that the inclusion and exclusion of citizens and non-citizens from the electoral rolls falls within the remit of the ECI. It also remarked that ECI was right in stating that an Aadhaar card is not conclusive proof of citizenship.

During the August 13 hearing, the Court noted that the ECI's decision to accept more documents to prove a person's identity for being included in the electoral rolls appeared to be voter friendly.

A day later, on August 14, the Court asked the ECI to upload online the list of 65 lakh voters proposed to be deleted from the electoral roll and disclose reasons for such proposed deletion.

Live updates from the hearing today feature here.

Hearing begins.

Sr Adv Rakesh Dwivedi for the Election Commission of India: We have complied with the earlier order in letter and spirit. Apart from BLA and panchayat, we have also pasted this (those excluded) outside police stations. Anyone wrongly excluded can file form with supporting documents.

Adv Prashant Bhushan: They have complied with the direction but the problem which has arisen...

Dwivedi: Please see para 3. We have not asked political parties to appoint certain number of agents. There is no maximum cap.

SC: There are 12 recognised political parties.. this is state or national level ?

Dwivedi: Both..

SC: 12 may or may not be national parties but they are state parties. Are parties here ?

Dwivedi: Not a single one.

Sr Adv Kapil Sibal: I am appearing for the Rashtriya Janata Dal.

Sr Adv AM Singhvi: I appear for the 7 political parties.

SC: Then tell us how many booth level agents are appointed and do you need to appoint more.

Dwivedi: Not a single party has filed a single objection also.

Justice Kant: So the member is but the Rashtriya Janta Dal is not before us. So only three political parties are before us out of 12.

Sr Adv Gopal Sankaranarayanan: Political parties are indirect. It's we the citizens who are affected.

SC: Yes, we had recognised that.

Sr Adv Dwivedi: There are 1.6 lakh BLAs and if each verifies 10 claims.

Justice Kant: Then it is 16 lakh per day. .. so total are 65 lakh.

Dwivedi: So 4 to 5 days it will take .. so there is no time squeeze. BLAs, political parties, and individuals can also verify.

Justice Kant: Can political parties file objection and claims?

Dwivedi: Yes yes. We don't mean to exclude anything which cannot be. ERO shall not delete any entry from draft roll without inquiring and affording an opportunity to be heard for them.

Justice Kant: Right to file objection is only for the individuals?

Dwivedi: Yes. Also individuals have to come forward and explain. If you are registered somewhere else, you must explain. Like I forgot to take off my name at the older place. For Maha Kumbh or Durga Puja.. people know.. they come forward . They don't have to be told. Same is with elections.

Bhushan: We have given some samples in the short time. They say 85,000 people have come forward. Many are migrant workers and working outside the State. There is flood in many districts of Bihar.

SC: But political parties BLAs are local persons and in small villages people know each other. At least, this info will be there. Who is a migrant etc.

Bhushan: We are saying all excluded may not be able to file their claims as some go outside from time to time for work. Major problem is filing claims under form 6. Aadhaar is permitted but again they have asked for some additional documents also from the 11.

Justice Kant: Listen, let the form be submitted only with Aadhaar.

Dwivedi: But they have to give a declaration.

Bhushan: We have attached specific complaints saying that it is not being accepted. Clarification could be that let application be made online and that let Aadhaar be given. But the other documents .. maximum circulation is of matriculation certificate. Coverage of that is 40 percent.

Justice Kant: Effort should be that let fresh application be submitted. If today I applied with Aadhaar and I also have matriculation certificate which I cannot find..

Dwivedi: Crores have been filing documents.. please wait and see. Repose some trust on the ECI.

Justice Kant: We are on inaction of political parties now. What are the booth level agents doing then? Why distance between political workers and the local people.

Sr Adv Gopal Sankarnarayanan: One day they will come in Delhi..and give these enumeration forms.. I will say this I will not fill it. See what was asked for in 2003.

SC: We will determine this. The entire process has to be voter friendly.

Sr Adv Gopal S: Please see this.. EPIC was used in 2003. Now you have said allow Aadhaar. They are saying to those who are going with Aadhaar that go with another document.

SC: Ask them to apply online..now. follow the process.

Adv Vrinda Grover: ECI is creating the problems and they do not want to hear it. They are creating the confusion.

Bhushan: Only one out of 5 crore has given a single document so far. Booth level officers have already written recommended and not recommended.

SC: We can direct despite the recommendation, names shall be not taken off from the draft list.

Grover: ECI should issue a press release on the documents given the fact that there is so much confusion on the ground and that there is reasonable time period.

Justice Kant: If these political parties used their agents properly..

Grover: But let not voters be caught in this tussle.

Dwivedi: They just want to frustrate the process.

Grover: Booth rationalisation has led me to be deleted from two booths.. in this timeline people will fall through the cracks.

Justice Kant: Today we will issue some additional directions.

Adv Nizamuddin Pasha: Please see this now the website can be improved so that these confusions do not arise.

Adv Fauzia Shakil: Objections have been improved and on the ground these objections have been facilitated by the BLA. Acknowledgement receipts are not given on the ground.

Supreme Court dictating order.

Order: A status report has been submitted. It is stated that district election officers had submitted the list of 65 lakh to the district presidents of the political parties. The presidents were present and they have signed the same. After publication of draft roll, inclusion of names and updating of roll shall be in accordance with form 7 of 1960 rules. One more round of booth level meetings were held on August 7. The proceedings of those meetings were also signed by the BLAs. Online facility is also available to file claims for inclusion in draft electoral roll.

Order: It is submitted that since there are 1.67 lakh BLAs ..with 10 per day...there shall be 16 lakh verification per day. It is stated 10 days are left to file objections till Sep 1. About 85,000 objections received from election. 2,60,000 objections received from new electors..

Order: We are surprised to see that 1.68 lakh BLAs have so far filed only two objections. On the other hand some of the political parties say there BLAs are not being permitted to submit objections. With a view to have better clarity and to ensure that each voter beside his or her independent right apart from applying for inclusion. All 12 political parties shall issue specific directions to party workers to assist in filing such forms with any 11 documents in form 6 or Aadhaar card. All political parties are impleaded.

Order: Let the state electoral officer inform the state political parties about the order and they they need to be present in court and file status reports. We reiterate order of August 14, and say they can apply online and no application by physical form is needed. BLAs of all political parties are to check 65 lakh who are not included in draft roll are facilitated or are dead or have voluntarily shifted their residence. BLOs are directed to acknowledge receipt of such forms. But such acknowledgement shall not mean completion of forms.

Order: Officials will consider the desirability of having such objections on the website.

Sr Adv AM Singhvi: I am told Mr Dwivedi is not averse to use Aadhaar. So why not have the Aadhaar for 7.24 crores also.

Dwivedi: Not one will fall through the cracks.

Grover: Most of the forms have been filed without a single document. Please include Aadhaar.

SC: Please examine all the documents submitted.

Justice Bagchi: Please see that part also because the earlier forms were examined at a time when Aadhaar was not mandated. Examine that aspect.

Hearing ends.