"Legitimate and constitutionally grounded," Supreme Court Upholds ECI's Decision To Conduct Bihar SIR

The Supreme Court of India has upheld the Election Commission of India’s (ECI) Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls in Bihar. 

A CJI Surya Kant led bench, in its verdict pronounce today has said SIR is not in conflict with the Representation of the People Act, 1950 and the Rules framed thereunder. "The impugned SIR does not supplant the Representation of the People Act and the Rules. Rather, it breathes life into the constitutional mandate under Article 324 within the precise statutory contours provided by Section 21(3). Therefore, it cannot be said that the Commission has acted in excess of its statutory powers," the CJI read today in court.

Court has further held that the object sought to be achieved by the SIR bears a direct nexus to the constitutional goal of free and fair elections. "Free and fair elections do not rest merely upon the mechanics of polling. They fundamentally depend upon the integrity, accuracy and credibility of the electoral rolls, which form the foundation of the democratic process," the bench also comprising Justices Bagchi and Pancholi has held.

On the reasons given by the ECI to conduct the SIR, namely the passage of more than four decades since the last intensive revision, large-scale additions and deletions over the years, rapid urbanisation, migration and the resulting possibility of repetition and inaccuracies in the electoral rolls, the bench observed that these are clearly directed towards preserving that foundational integrity.

ECI did not resort to SIR solely for administrative convenience, the court has held. It further noted that procedural safeguards introduced by ECI and through directions of the Supreme Court from time to time sought to strike a balance between the need for electoral integrity and the protection of constitutional rights.

"SIR meets the requirements of proportionality. The measures adopted bear a reasonable nexus to the objectives sought to be achieved, are not manifestly excessive and are accompanied by sufficient procedural safeguards to prevent arbitrary exclusion. We hold that the impugned exercise was founded upon a legitimate and constitutionally grounded purpose, namely the restoration of accuracy, completeness and integrity of the electoral rolls," the bench has further held.

Last year, the court had heard submissions from Advocate Prashant Bhushan for the Association for Democratic Reforms (ADR), and Senior Advocate Rakesh Dwivedi for the ECI.

The ECI 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 had told the Court, adding that no political party or individual voter was before the Bench except public interest groups.

The Commission had explained that of Bihar’s 7.9 crore registered voters, 7.24 crore had already submitted forms. Preliminary figures showed 22 lakh voters were confirmed dead, 36 lakh had shifted to other states, and 7 lakh had enrolled elsewhere, categories that do not amount to wrongful deletion. Dwivedi stressed that voters on the 2003 roll and their adult children did not need to file new proofs, significantly reducing the compliance burden.

Various pleas were filed before the Supreme Court of India challenging the order and communication dated 24 June, 2025 issued by the Election Commission of India (ECI) directing for Special Intensive Revision of Electoral Rolls in Bihar (SIR Order).

The petition filed by Association for Democratic Reforms and a few others has challenged the ECI's order for being in violation of Articles 14, 19, 21, 325 and 326 of the Constitution of India as well as provisions of Representation of People’s Act, 1950 and Rule 21A of the Registration of Electors Rules, 1960. "The SIR order dated 24.06.2025 if not set aside, can arbitrarily and without due process disenfranchise lakhs of voters from electing their representatives, thereby disrupting free and fair elections and democracy in the country, which are part of basic structure of the Constitution", the plea stated.

It was ADR's case that the documentation requirements of the directive, lack of due process as well as the unreasonably short timeline for the said Special Intensive Revision of Electoral Roll in Bihar make this exercise bound to result in removal of names of lakhs of genuine voters from electoral rolls leading to their disenfranchisement.

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

Bench: CJI Surya Kant, Justice Joymalya Bagchi and Justice Pancholi

Judgment Date: May 27, 2026