On Friday, in the ongoing Bihar Special Intensive Revision (SIR) matter, the Supreme Court, permitted voters excluded from the draft electoral rolls to submit claims for inclusion through online mode, eliminating the need for physical submission of forms. The Court clarified that applicants may furnish an Aadhaar card or any of the eleven identity documents recognised by the Election Commission of India (ECI).
A Bench of Justice Surya Kant and Justice Joymalya Bagchi issued the directions while hearing petitions challenging the large-scale exclusion of names from Bihar’s draft electoral rolls published after the SIR exercise.
The matter arises from challenges to the Election Commission’s Special Intensive Revision of Bihar’s electoral rolls ahead of the November Assembly elections. Concerns intensified after nearly 65 lakh names were reported excluded from the draft rolls. Earlier, the Court had directed the ECI to publish district-wise lists of excluded voters, along with reasons such as death, migration, or duplication, and to make the data searchable by EPIC numbers. The Bench had stressed that the exercise should focus on “en masse inclusion rather than en masse exclusion.”
The Court directed the 12 recognised political parties in Bihar to ensure their Booth Level Agents (BLAs) assist excluded voters in filing forms. All recognised political parties have been impleaded as respondents, wherever they were not already petitioners.
Expressing surprise at the low participation, the Bench remarked that despite nearly 1.6 lakh BLAs in the State, only two objections had been filed. Some parties alleged that BLOs were refusing to acknowledge objections submitted by BLAs. In response, the Court directed Booth Level Officers (BLOs) to issue acknowledgement receipts for all objections and physical forms.
Senior Advocate Rakesh Dwivedi, appearing for the ECI, submitted that compliance affidavits had been filed. He informed the Court that the lists of excluded voters, along with reasons for deletion, were published on official websites, displayed at polling booths, and shared with political parties’ BLAs in line with the Court’s August 14 order.
He added that over two lakh applications for inclusion had already been filed by new voters and argued that political parties were attempting to “whip up fear for political interests” rather than aiding the process.
Senior Advocates Kapil Sibal (for RJD MP Manoj Jha) and Dr. Abhishek Manu Singhvi (for INC, CPI(M), CPI, NCP and others) disputed ECI’s claim, asserting that opposition parties were actively engaged in the matter.
Advocate Prashant Bhushan (for ADR) highlighted difficulties faced by migrant workers living outside Bihar, while Advocate Vrinda Grover pointed out instances where BLOs refused to accept Aadhaar as a standalone identity document. Advocate Faouzia Shakil sought extension of the September 1 deadline, emphasising that exclusion lists were published only on August 19.
The Bench suggested that applications supported by Aadhaar or matriculation certificates should be accepted online and emphasised that BLAs could verify documents swiftly. It noted that if each of the 1.6 lakh BLAs verified just 10 documents daily, the entire verification process could be concluded within 4–5 days.
The case remains under consideration, with the Supreme Court seeking to balance voters’ rights, procedural fairness, and the ECI’s statutory duties under the Representation of the People Act, 1950, and the Registration of Electors Rules, 1960.
Picture Source :
