Karnataka High Court says petition challenging SIR in State is premature; ECI will address issues

The Karnataka High Court on Tuesday disposed of a writ petition challenging the procedure by which the Election Commission of India (ECI) was conducting the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls in the State [Devanura Mahadeva & Ors v Election Commission of India].

The Division Bench of Chief Justice Vibhu Bakhru and Justice KS Hemalekha observed that the ECI was empowered to address issues arising from the SIR.

"The ECI is tasked with the conduct of SIR and it is a specialised body and we find no reasons to proceed on the basis that the ECI would not be able to address procedural issues it may encounter during the conduct of SIR. The question whether the timelines are sufficient to complete the task is a matter that is within the specialized domain of the ECI. It would not be apposite for this Court to determine this issue at this stage."

Senior Advocate Vikram Huilgol, representing the petitioners, submitted that the petition questioned the timeline proposed to complete the SIR.

The sufficiency of a 10-day training programme provided to anganwadi workers and teachers who were conducting the house-to-house SIR, as well as the assistance they would provide to voters to complete SIR forms, were also raised as issues that could lead to discrepancies and deletion of voters.

The petitioners also raised an issue with the procedure for not providing notice to citizens prior to publication of the draft electoral rolls.

Advocate General Shashi Kiran Shetty, appearing for the State, submitted that the Cabinet made a detailed representation containing issues outlined by the petitioners to the ECI on June 15, 2026.

The Court noted that the State had already made a representation to the ECI on these issues.

"The State has already made representation in this regard and we find ground to assume that the same would be given the consideration the said representation deserves. At this stage, we find the present petition is premature and therefore decline to entertain the same," the Court said.

Counsel appearing for the ECI told the Court that other High Courts such as those of Sikkim and Delhi have declined to entertain writ petitions regarding the SIR. He also submitted that the Supreme Court was hearing similar issues.

It was further submitted that the ECI was conscious of the timeline to complete the exercise and would extend the timeline if needed.

The counsel countered the petitioner's arguments by stating that notices to voters could only be issued after the draft roll was published. He further submitted that voters would have time to respond to notices until September 16, 2026. All such cases would be speedily disposed off within October 15, 2026.

The Court noted that since the Supreme Court was hearing similar matters, it would not pass an order on a subject that is sub-judice.

"We also note the contention advanced by the ECI, that petitions raising similar issues are pending before the Supreme Court. For this reason also, this would not be necessary for this Court to examine the issues raised at the present stage. The writ petition is disposed off. "

While dismissing the case, the Court observed that the issues raised by the petitioners were in anticipation of problems that would arise after the publication of the draft rolls.

Huilgol further submitted that Chief Minister DK Shivakumar had made a statement that deletion from the electoral rolls would have adverse effects on those who seek to benefit from welfare schemes.

"Nothing has happened, persons have not been denied their welfare schemes now you are assuming first their names will be excluded on the basis they will be denied welfare schemes," the Court said.