Recently, the Supreme Court considered challenges to the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls in poll-bound Bihar. The bench of Justices Surya Kant and Joymalya Bagchi observed that as the Election Commission of India (ECI) is a constitutional authority, it will be presumed to act within the law. At the same time, the Court cautioned that any illegality in the process would vitiate the entire exercise.
The petitioners, including Ashwini Kumar Upadhyay, Prashant Bhushan, and Vrinda Grover, contended that the ECI had not complied with its own procedures, resulting in arbitrary deletions and lack of transparency. They argued that Aadhaar cannot serve as proof of citizenship and highlighted that women migrants were disproportionately affected by the revision. Petitioners also pointed to the stoppage of EC’s daily bulletins and alleged that only partial data on claims and objections was being updated. The ECI, represented by senior counsel Rakesh Dwivedi and Gopal Sankaranarayanan, defended the process as falling within its exclusive jurisdiction under the Representation of the People Act, adding that Aadhaar was validly included as the 12th document pursuant to the Court’s earlier order.
The Court observed that the ECI, being well-versed in electoral law, can distinguish between genuine electors and infiltrators, and reiterated that it would presume the poll body is acting constitutionally. While noting concerns about transparency and privacy, the bench declined to issue piecemeal directions. It fixed October 7 for final hearing, clarifying that the legality of the entire exercise will be judicially scrutinized, and if any infirmity is found, the process will be set aside.
Source Link
Picture Source :