The Supreme Court on Monday continued its scrutiny of the Election Commission of India's (ECI) Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of Bihar's electoral rolls, reaffirming its jurisdiction to nullify the entire process "if" any procedural irregularities or violations of constitutional rights are uncovered. The bench, comprising Justices Surya Kant and Joymalya Bagchi, scheduled final arguments for October 7, signalling a pivotal review that could influence voter list updates in other election-bound states like West Bengal.
The hearing focused on petitions filed by opposition leaders, activists, and NGOs challenging the ECI's June 24 notification for the SIR, which mandates voters to submit proof of citizenship and identity to remain on the rolls ahead of Bihar's November assembly elections. Petitioners, including Rashtriya Janata Dal (RJD) MP Manoj Jha and the Association for Democratic Reforms (ADR), argued that the exercise risks mass disenfranchisement, particularly among marginalised communities, by shifting the burden of proof onto existing voters without adequate notice or due process.
Justice Surya Kant emphasised the court's oversight role, stating that while it presumes the ECI a constitutional body - is acting lawfully, "any illegality would lead to the entire exercise being set aside." The bench refused to issue piecemeal rulings, opting instead for a comprehensive examination post-finalisation of the voter list on September 30. Earlier directives included accepting Aadhaar as the 12th valid identity document (though not as citizenship proof) and allowing claims and objections beyond the September 1 deadline to mitigate exclusions.
The SIR has already resulted in the omission of approximately 65 lakh names from the draft rolls published on August 1, sparking fears of arbitrary deletions. Senior advocate Prashant Bhushan, representing some petitioners, highlighted that the process contravenes principles of natural justice, as booth-level officers, often low-ranking officials - were empowered to verify citizenship, a domain typically reserved for the Ministry of Home Affairs. The ECI defended the revision as essential for electoral integrity, citing complaints from political parties about inaccuracies in the rolls, last intensively updated in 2003. It added 85,000 new voters but noted minimal objections from parties, only two filed by booth agents.
Legal observers point out that the court's invocation of its 1977 judgment in “Mohinder Singh Gill v. Chief Election Commissioner” underscores judicial intervention as a check against ECI overreach. In that ruling, the apex court clarified that while the poll body enjoys wide powers under Article 324, it is not "a law unto itself," and courts can "quash the action" if it disrupts fair elections.
The proceedings carry weighty implications for states facing polls in 2026, including West Bengal. During the Bihar hearings, Trinamool Congress MP Kalyan Banerjee raised concerns over a similar SIR notice issued to West Bengal's Chief Electoral Officer, who indicated readiness to proceed. Petitioners warned of potential disenfranchisement in Bengal, where assembly elections loom, and linked it to broader ECI plans for nationwide revisions. The bench deferred Bengal-specific arguments, stating it would address them separately, but acknowledged the interconnectedness: "Bengal can wait for now, but the principles will apply."
In West Bengal, opposition voices like Leader of Opposition Suvendhu Adhikari have called for a Bihar-style SIR to weed out "fake voters," while the ruling Trinamool Congress alleges it's a ploy to target minorities. The ECI maintains that SIRs are routine under Section 21(3) of the Representation of the People Act, 1950, aimed at excluding non-citizens and duplicates without targeting any community. It has published searchable lists of deleted voters on district websites, as ordered by the court, including reasons for exclusion to enable appeals.
As Bihar's political landscape heats up, with the NDA government under Chief Minister Nitish Kumar backing the SIR for "clean rolls," opposition parties like RJD and Congress decry it as anti-democratic. RJD leader Tejashwi Yadav termed the hearing a "victory for vigilance," urging the court to extend safeguards to other states. The October 7 date looms large, potentially reshaping how electoral rolls are revised in India's federal democracy and ensuring no "illegality" undermines the ballot.
