Bihar SIR: Supreme Court Calls Wider Range of Documents ‘Voter-Friendly’
Petitioners alleged over 65 lakh voters unlawfully deleted in Bihar’s Special Intensive Revision; Supreme Court flagged Aadhaar concerns but calls wider document options “voter-friendly";
The Supreme Court on Tuesday continued hearing a batch of petitions challenging the Election Commission of India’s (ECI) ongoing “Special Intensive Revision” (SIR) of Bihar’s electoral rolls ahead of the Assembly elections, with petitioners alleging that the exercise has led to the unlawful deletion of over 65 lakh voters without due process.
The Bench of Justice Surya Kant and Justice Joymalya Bagchi heard extensive submissions from Senior Advocates Dr. Abhishek Manu Singhvi, Gopal Sankaranarayanan, Shadan Farasat, Prashant Bhushan, and others appearing for different petitioners, including the Association for Democratic Reforms (ADR).
During Singhvi’s submissions, Justice Bagchi noted that while Aadhaar-based requirements may have an exclusionary effect, the availability of a larger number of permissible documents “is actually voter-friendly” as it provides citizens multiple options to prove their eligibility. The Court asked whether, if the enumeration form incorporated statutory Form 4, it would still comply with the rules.
Singhvi argued that the ECI’s criteria cut out many citizens who lack property papers, residence certificates, or passports, and that Form 6 requires only a self-declaration. He said the deletion of 65 lakh names in Bihar without notice or due process violated the Representation of People Act, 1950 and 1951, and amounted to “de facto deletion” without lawful procedure.
Sankaranarayanan, appearing for Association for Democratic Reforms, contended that the ECI had invented new documentary requirements without legal authority, and that the SIR amounted to fresh preparation of rolls, unprecedented in India’s electoral history. He stressed that voting is an “integral right” and cannot be taken away except on constitutionally recognised grounds.
Bhushan said the BLO-led enumeration process was arbitrary and impossible to conduct fairly in the short time available, and accused the ECI of malafide intent by refusing to publish names of deleted voters online and removing the draft roll’s search facility.
Farasat argued that the draft roll must begin from the existing roll, and that voters who did not submit forms could not be presumed ineligible.
The Bench indicated it would focus on laying down broad principles applicable to all States, with adjustments for local conditions. It will tomorrow give 30 minutes to the remaining petitioners before hearing the ECI’s submissions.
Hearing will resume at 11 am on Thursday (August 14).
Yesterday, the Election Commission had strongly defending the exercise as lawful, necessary and in public interest. “This is a purification exercise to ensure a clean and accurate voter list. Dead and shifted voters must be removed to maintain the integrity of the rolls. The process is transparent, and most voters need not submit fresh documents,” Dwivedi told the Court, adding that no political party or individual voter was before the Bench except public interest groups.
An Interlocutory Application had been filed by ADR on August 8, in the ongoing case concerning the Special Intensive Revision of electoral rolls in Bihar, with serious concerns raised about the omission of over 65 lakh names from the draft rolls. The Apex Court had sought ECI's response.
On July 28, the Supreme Court reiterated its stance that it was not going to stay the 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.
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.
Earlier, the ECI had 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 had emphasized that these documents lack legal sanctity for determining citizenship and thus cannot be relied upon to validate voter eligibility. The affidavit was 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.
On July 10, the Apex Court had 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.
Case Title: Association for Democratic Reforms & Ors v. Election Commission of India & Anr.
Mentioning Date: August 13, 2025
Bench: Justice Surya Kant and Justice Joymalya Bagchi