The Supreme Court on Thursday asked the Election Commission of India (ECI) to upload online the list of 65 lakh voters proposed to be deleted during the ongoing Special Intensive Revision (SRI) in Bihar..The Bench of Justices Surya Kant and Joymalya Bagchi also ordered that the ECI shall disclose reasons for the deletion. The Court particularly focused on the draft roll declaring 22 Lakh people dead and in total excluding 65 Lakh."There is a narrative [that] I don't know... if you bring it in public domain that narrative disappears," Justice Kant said.The Court said that at present, people are at the mercy of booth level officers (BLOs) or political parties. "Why not put it on display boards or a website that these are persons deceased, shifted or are duplicated," the Court asked. When the counsel representing the ECI said the "narrative" may not disappear and that there has been tremendous publicity, Justice Bagchi said,"We are not on narrative per se but two things are important... the departure ... of suo motu deletion is not permissible in election year but if special circumstances [exist], and that SOP also requires wide publicity. Taking these two together, fundamental right to know requires wide publicity in situations ... particularly to migrant people.".Justice Bagchi also said that the disclosure should be in the form of list and not a system where a person has to feed information to the system and then find out the status."What we are asking is to be more transparent. We are saying instead of this put the entire data set on the website," the Court said.In response, ECI counsel Senior Advocate Rakesh Dwivedi said that the list will be uploaded at the district level. He also said an advertisement will be published to notify the public, particularly the migrants.On the suggestion that it may be made searchable, Dwivedi raised the argument of privacy. "This searching will be by EPIC number," he said.Dwivedi also said that nobody has been deleted as of now since the earlier list operates till it is replaced."Today it is preparation. We have asked for the documents. If electoral roll is being revised.. the EPIC card will either get updated or excluded," Dwivedi said..The Court then passed the following directions:1. The list of 65 lakh voters, whose names appeared in 2025 list but are not included in draft list, shall be displayed on websites of district electoral officers. The information would be booth-wise but it can be accessed by referring to EPIC number. The lists shall be published on website of Chief Electoral Officer, Bihar.2. The reasons of non-exclusion in the draft roll shall also be disclosed.3. Wide publicity shall be given in newspapers about the uploading of the list. It shall also be broadcast and telecast on television and radio channels. If the district election officer have official social media handle, they shall display there also.4. In the public notice, it shall also be expressly mentioned that any aggrieved person may submit their claims along with copy of Aadhaar card. 5. The list of voters shall also be put on display at offices of panchayat and block development officers. .The Court was hearing a batch of petitions challenging the ECI’s June 24 directive ordering an SIR of electoral rolls ahead of the upcoming Bihar assembly elections.One of the petitioners, Association of Democratic Reforms (ADR), argued that the SIR can arbitrarily and without due process disenfranchise lakhs of citizens from electing their representatives, thereby disrupting free and fair elections and democracy in the country. On the other hand, the ECI defended its June 24 directive, asserting that it has plenary powers under Article 324 of the Constitution and Section 21(3) of the Representation of the People Act, 1950 to conduct a revision of electoral rolls. It told the Court that the exercise was necessitated by factors such as urban migration, demographic changes and concerns raised about inaccuracies in the existing rolls, which had not undergone an intensive revision for nearly two decades..On August 6, the Court was told that 65 lakh names were dropped from the draft Bihar electoral roll published on August 1.The ECI in a response assured the Court that no name will be struck off the draft electoral roll without prior notice, a hearing opportunity and a reasoned order from the competent authority. It also said that the Representation of People Act, 1950 and the Registration of Electors Rules, 1960 do not require the ECI to publish the reasons for non-inclusion of anyone in the draft electoral rolls for any reason. On Tuesday, the Court observed that the inclusion and exclusion of citizens and non-citizens from the electoral rolls falls within the remit of the ECI. It also observed that the ECI was right in stating that Aadhaar was not conclusive proof of citizenship.Yesterday, the Court remarked that the fact that the Election Commission of India (ECI) had increased the number of documents for proof of citizenship made the Bihar Special Intensive Revision (SIR) more voter-friendly. During the hearing today, the Court said prima facie ECI has the power to hold SIR. The matter will be heard next on August 22..Arguments today.In response to the petitioners' arguments, Senior Advocate Dwivedi, representing the ECI, today submitted that the Commission has enough reservoir of power to take decisions when it comes to electoral process in the country. "I will contest everything on reasonableness and rationality and we will not assume the high pedestal that we are omnipotent and we can do everything," he said.Dwivedi further submitted that the ECI was subject to a "sharp political [hostility]" in the country where "political congruence" happens in very few matters. In this regard, he highlighted the unsuccessful legal challenges to the Electronic Voting Machines. "We have found sharp contest. Those who lose have to find some excuse. We are unfortunately caught between struggles of political parties. Democracy is such that political parties have necessities of projecting particular perceptions to win elections. We understand that," he added. .Those who lose have to find some excuse. We are unfortunately caught between struggles of political parties. Democracy is such that political parties have necessities of projecting particular perceptions to win elections.ECI to Supreme Court.Dwivedi also submitted some counsel had tried to bring "melodrama" in the case, while referring to the example of psephologist Yogendra Yadav coming to Court with two people who were earlier declared dead in the electoral records. The senior counsel said the same was done without any affidavit about the two persons.He also questioned the arguments aimed at projecting that many people do not have identity documents in Bihar."It was projected Bihar is some dark spot ... Bihar, whatever it was in the beginning, today Bihar has 80 percent literacy rate. It is 65 percent even for women. The youth of 21st century is not same," Dwivedi said..The petitioners also made arguments earlier and concluded their submissions today..Advocate Nizam Pasha, representing a lawmaker from Bihar, submitted that when process of enrollment during intensive and summary revision is same, the people holding EPIC cards cannot be excluded. He added that the decision to base SIR on the basis of 2003 electoral list is not valid and based on any intelligible differentia.He also said the electoral officers failed to provide any receipts to the people submitting their enrollment forms, adding that system is heavy with discretion available to the lowest level officers"No receipt of my form being given or documents given. So on that basis BLO has an upper hand," he submitted.Pasha further highlighted that 231 persons were deleted from a single booth. He urged the Court to ask ECI to put on record what documents were sought in 2003..Senior Advocate Shoeb Alam, also appearing for a member of legislative assembly, argued that SIR notification did not disclose sufficient reasons for ECI to have ordered the intensive exercise. The process undertaken under the SIR notification in Bihar was neither summary nor intensive, he added. "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 Act says you have to go reasons," Alam said.He further said the spirit of the law is to ensure inclusion of as many people in the electoral roll. "This is a process of voter registration and cannot be a process of disqualification. This is a process to welcome and not turn this into a process to unwelcome," he added..Senior Advocate KS Chauhan and advocates Vrinda Grover, Fauzia Shakil, and Rashmi Singh also made brief arguments."ECI order is arbitrary and suffers from non application of mind. First is haste shown. See the timeline to complete the process in a State like Bihar. Even for 1 crore people to upload documents in a State which is not so advanced in digital literacy. Floods are worse in September and October and that is when the process is being carried out," Shakil submitted.Singh argued that block level officers were put through impractical tasks without adequate infrastructure. "They have to collect 100 forms per day when it is difficult to even collect 40 forms per day. Only 0.37 percent SC community has access to computers.. this was their own caste survey," she said..Senior Advocate Maninder Singh also appeared for the ECI.
