Supreme Court hears Bihar electoral roll revision case: LIVE UPDATES

The Court is hearing a batch of petitions challenging the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls in Bihar.
Supreme Court, Bihar SIR
Supreme Court, Bihar SIR

Alam: This is a process of voter registration and cannot be a process of disqualification. This is a process to welcome, not to turn into a process to unwelcome.

Senior Advocate Shoeb Alam makes submissions: I am on the right under section 21. See the operative part.. "reasons to be recorded." There is insufficiency of reasons in the impugned notification. The process invented is neither summary nor intensive and a creature of the impugned notification. The statutory limitations for the exercise of powers can only be done when reasons are recorded in writing.

Bench takes a short break for 2 minutes

Justice Bagchi: We would like ECI to state what documents were taken in 2003 exercise.

Pasha: Have the same put on record.

Justice Bagchi: Yes.

Pasha: No receipt of my form being given or documents given. So on that basis BLO has an upper hand.

Justice Bagchi: But as per rules they should.

Pasha: yes I have filed an affidavit saying not given. BLO exercising discretion whether form has to be taken or not. System is heavy with discretion available to the lowest level officers.

Pasha: Process of enrolling under intensive and summary is same. Then how can EPIC is discarded on that basis. Thus the date of 2003 is not valid and is not based on intelligible differentia.

Hearing begins.

Advocate Nizamuddin Pasha appears for petitioner: This Court said if date of 1.1.2003 goes, then everything goes ... Nothing was there to show why date is there. The impression sought to be conveyed is they earlier date and as when intensive exercise was there. So EPIC card issued then is more reliable than issued during summary exercise is incorrect. See rule 25 of 1960 rules.

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 Tuesday, 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.

In yesterday's 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.

Live updates from the hearing today feature here.

Related Stories

No stories found.
Bar and Bench - Indian Legal news
www.barandbench.com