Bihar SIR cannot be stayed, Supreme Court makes it clear

The Supreme Court today reiterated its stance that it was not going to stay the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls in Bihar. "There should not be mass exclusion.. we want mass inclusion", a Justice Surya Kant led bench further told the Election Commission of India.

On a submission made by Senior Advocate Gopal Sankaranarayanan that the ECI cannot finalise the roll, the Supreme Court clarified that it was only a draft and it would not take away the court's powers to quash the process in the future.

Notably, the bench also comprising Justice Joymalya Bagchi told the ECI to include Aadhar and EPIC Cards in the process of revision. "You proceed with these three documents.. and then authenticate...include these two documents..", the bench said.

The court accordingly directed the parties to provide it with a timeline for hearing the matter and said that it would take up the same shortly for hearing.

Recently, Association for Democratic Reforms told the Supreme Court of India that Election Commission of India has given no valid reason for exclusion of Aadhar, EPIC and Ration Card from the list of documents which can be submitted during the Special Intensive Revision of Electoral Rolls being carried out in Bihar.

This fresh affidavit was filed in the batch of petitions challenging the ECI’s June 24, 2025 order mandating a Special Intensive Revision in Bihar ahead of the Assembly elections later this year. 

Court has further been told that Aadhar card is one of the documents accepted for obtaining Permanent Residence Certificate, OBC/SC/ST Certificate and for passport which makes ECI’s rejection of Aadhar (which is most widely held document) under the instant SIR order patently absurd.

Recently, the Election Commission of India (ECI) told the Supreme Court that Aadhaar, Electoral Photo Identity Cards (EPIC), and ration cards cannot be accepted as valid proof of citizenship during the ongoing Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls in Bihar. In a detailed affidavit filed in response to petitions challenging the revision drive, the Commission emphasized that these documents lack legal sanctity for determining citizenship and thus cannot be relied upon to validate voter eligibility.

The affidavit, submitted in a batch of petitions led by NGO Association for Democratic Reforms (ADR), marks a significant legal moment in the debate surrounding the intersection of identity documentation and electoral rights. The petitioners have argued that requiring proof of citizenship risks arbitrary exclusion, discrimination, and potential disenfranchisement of genuine voters. The ECI has countered this by asserting that the revision is constitutionally mandated and vital for cleansing the electoral rolls.

On July 10, the top court allowed the Election Commission of India (ECI) to proceed with its Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls in Bihar but directed that documents like Aadhaar, EPIC voter ID cards, and ration cards should also be considered in the process. The ECI, however, clarified that Aadhaar cards, while widely used for welfare and identification purposes, are not evidence of Indian citizenship. Referring to the statutory disclaimer attached to every Aadhaar card, the Commission pointed out that Aadhaar is only an identity document and explicitly not a citizenship certificate.

Similarly, the Commission argued that EPICs, commonly known as voter ID cards, are generated based on existing entries in the electoral roll and do not serve as independent proof of nationality. Ration cards, often used by the economically weaker sections, have also been excluded due to their vulnerability to fraud and inconsistencies. Accepting these documents, the Commission said, would defeat the purpose of the intensive revision, which seeks to build the electoral roll afresh through on-ground verification rather than depending on legacy documents.

The Commission defended its move to seek supporting documents from electors as a necessary exercise flowing from Article 324 of the Constitution and Sections 16 and 19 of the Representation of the People Act, 1950. These provisions require every voter to be an Indian citizen, above 18 years of age, and an ordinary resident of the constituency. Refuting allegations of arbitrary action or an attempt to strip citizenship, the EC stated that the revision process merely assesses eligibility to vote, not nationality per se. No person is being declared a foreigner or stripped of Indian citizenship through this process, the EC said, adding that the powers to make such declarations lie exclusively with the central government under Section 9 of the Citizenship Act, 1955.

Case Title: Association for Democratic Reforms & Ors vs. Election Commission of India & Anr

Hearing Date: July 28, 2025

Bench: Justices Kant and Bagchi