
A regime of suspicion
Most important, in its 1995 judgment in Lal Babu Hussein, the Supreme Court held that if the names of such persons were included on the electoral rolls in the previous election, it would ordinarily imply that due verification had taken place prior to their inclusion. This presumption arose from the court's trust that official acts carried out under provisions of the Representation of the People Act, 1950 and the Registration of Electors Rules, 1960 were regularly performed.
The 1994 instance was a limited malaise, targeting approximately 1.67 lakh individuals in specific pockets of Greater Bombay and a few polling stations in Delhi. Thirty-one years later, the Election Commission appears to be re-enacting this practice, but on a different scale in Bihar, just ahead of the Assembly election. The commission's order dated June 24, 2025 mandates that all voters enrolled after 2003 submit proof of Indian citizenship, without any specific allegation or evidence of impropriety. Even more discomforting is that the justification offered is not suspicion of infiltration or fraud but merely that 'significant change in electoral rolls has taken place' over the past two decades.
Upon widespread criticism of the move, while the Election Commission has emphasised that individuals whose names were included on the 2003 electoral rolls would only need to submit an extract thereof, the reality is that a significant number of voters were enrolled after 2003. These individuals are now being asked to submit proof of their birth in India. Moreover, anyone born after 1987 is required to furnish proof of their parents' citizenship as well. For example, a person born in the 1990s would not have been included on the 2003 electoral rolls, but may have been included on subsequent rolls. Even such a person would now be required to submit proof of citizenship as his previous inclusion is being ignored.
In effect, the Election Commission is undermining its own electoral rolls and elector photo identity cards (EPICs) issued since 2003 — documents that have been used in five Lok Sabha and as many Assembly elections in Bihar, not to mention multiple byelections. The implication is that these official records are no longer considered reliable by the very institution that created them. This institutional self-disavowal is not just bureaucratically absurd — it is unconstitutional in the same breath.
Moreover, the commission seems to have forgotten the fact that testing citizenship or requiring proof thereof is not within its statutory remit, making the entire exercise devoid of any statutory backing.
Equally alarming is the shifting of the burden of proof. Under the 1950 Act and the 1960 Rules, the standard requirement is a declaration of citizenship by the voter. However, the current exercise demands documentary proof of citizenship. This represents a fundamental departure from the law, and conveniently flips the burden of proof onto the voter.
In Lal Babu Hussein, the Supreme Court emphasised that material evidence and an opportunity to be heard must precede any move to question a person's citizenship. Here, however, the presumption is reversed: every voter is treated as a potential non-citizen unless proven otherwise.
This reversal is starkly evident in the commission's June 24 order, which states unambiguously that 'the EROs shall treat the electoral roll of 2003 with qualifying date of 01.01.2003 as probative evidence of eligibility, including presumption of citizenship, unless they receive any other input otherwise'.
This shift in burden is especially problematic because no such requirement exists in the Citizenship Act, 1955. Under Section 3, persons claiming citizenship by birth are not required to make any application or obtain certification to prove their citizenship — unlike those seeking citizenship by registration or naturalisation. The EC's order thus seems to import into the electoral process a regime of suspicion that even the citizenship law does not envisage.
Chilling effect
Another concerning aspect of this entire exercise — which demands herculean compliance in a very short span — is its likely chilling effect on voter participation. In a State like Bihar, which already witnesses low voter turnouts, an exercise like this, coupled with the threat that anyone suspected of being a foreigner will be referred to the competent authority under the Citizenship Act, 1955, will most severely affect the most marginalised and underprivileged.
Faced with the prospect of producing documents, engaging with bureaucracy, and being subject to the discretion of a booth-level officer, many may simply opt not to vote at all. Elections must empower citizens. But this exercise flips that ideal: instead of the state proving someone is ineligible to vote, the citizens must now prove they are eligible — a reversal that strikes at the very heart of universal adult franchise.
What is unfolding in Bihar can be a cause of concern for those outside Bihar as well. As the June 24 order makes it abundantly clear, the exercise is being undertaken in Bihar in view of the upcoming elections and is actually envisaged for the entire country. If such an exercise — with no statutory backing, no suspicion, and no individualised inquiry — is replicated at the national level, it will amount to mass disenfranchisement by non-inclusion of those failing to submit required documents and by non-participation in the exercise due to the chilling effect it creates. This will normalise distrust toward vast swathes of the population, especially the poor, minorities, and the marginalised — groups that historically have had to struggle for recognition in the democratic process.
That such a revision is taking place months before a State election, rather than during the regular annual summary revision cycle under Section 21 of the Representation of the People Act, 1950, only deepens concerns of constitutional violations and political intent.
The right to vote is a constitutional guarantee, a key facet of India's democratic framework and rooted in the principle of universal adult suffrage. It is not a privilege contingent on paperwork or pedigree, but a core mechanism through which citizens of all walks of life participate in governance and hold the state accountable.
Dangerous precedent
By imposing evidentiary burdens on millions of voters without specific allegations or due procedure, the Election Commission's actions in Bihar risk undermining decades of democratic progress. This exercise does not merely revise electoral rolls — it reshapes the relationship between the citizen and the state. It, therefore, sets a dangerous precedent.
It is this same exercise of doubting a voter's citizenship without any material that had resulted in the judgment in Lal Babu Hussein. It seems the Election Commission has now found a way to circle around the judgment by not alleging any individual voter to be non-citizen but rather presuming all persons to be potential non-citizens under the garb of an innocuous statement that it is merely revising the rolls and in doing so it must ensure that only citizens are included. This makes the elections in Bihar an example of conditional democracy and not a constitutional one.
(Fuzail Ahmad Ayyubi is an advocate-on-record practising at the Supreme Court; views are personal)
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Mint
9 minutes ago
- Mint
PM Modi receives a heartfelt reception from the Indian diaspora in the UK, says ‘Touched by the warm welcome'
Prime Minister Narendra Modi thanked the Indian diaspora in the United Kingdom for their warm welcome, describing their enthusiasm and dedication to India's development as "truly heartening." PM Modi said on X, "Touched by the warm welcome from the Indian community in the UK. Their affection and passion towards India's progress is truly heartening." During his ongoing visit to the United Kingdom, PM Modi was warmly received by members of the Indian diaspora in London. Many in the crowd expressed their excitement and admiration after meeting him, describing the experience as both surreal and emotionally overwhelming. PM Modi arrived in the United Kingdom on Wednesday in the first leg of his two-nation visit, with the two countries poised to further strengthen bilateral ties by signing a Free Trade Agreement. PM Modi landed in London for a two-day visit to the United Kingdom.


Mint
9 minutes ago
- Mint
Canada fires fresh salvo at India's electronics subsidy at WTO amid trade dialogue reset
New Delhi: Canada has stepped up scrutiny of Indian subsidies for electronics and semiconductor production, submitting a fresh set of questions at the World Trade Organization (WTO) this month. The latest round of queries focuses not only on central government schemes such as Scheme for Promotion of Manufacturing of Electronic Components and Semiconductors (SPECS) and the expired North East Industrial Development Scheme, but also scrutinises state-level programmes such as Karnataka's New Industrial Policy (2020-25) and State Incentive Subsidy programmes, as per a WTO document reviewed by Mint. The move comes at a time when New Delhi and Ottawa have begun talks on resuming bilateral trade negotiations after a period of frosty ties. According to a WTO communication dated 21 July, Canada has sought further clarity on SPECS, particularly the product categories covered by it and the eligibility criteria that applicants must meet. The queries come against the backdrop of India recording an exponential rise in exports of electronic goods to Canada—from $64.17 million in FY22 to $214.57 million in FY25, marking a jump of 235%, commerce ministry data showed. India had earlier stated that electronic goods under this scheme are identified through Harmonized System of Nomenclature (HSN) codes, and that the eligibility requirements vary across sub-programmes. In its new query, Canada has asked India to share the full list of relevant HSN codes and provide more detail on the eligibility norms, as per the WTO document. "India is preparing to provide written responses to Canada's latest queries within the stipulated timeframe," said a government official who wished not to be named. Earlier in April, Canada was one of three countries, along with the UK and the US, that questioned India's electronics manufacturing subsidy, which India defended as being consistent with WTO norms, arguing that the programmes aim to build domestic capacity in a critical sector and attract investments into electronic value chains. Canada's questions are part of its ongoing review of India's 2021-2023 new and full subsidy notification to the WTO's Committee on Subsidies and Countervailing Measures. "With industrial policy making a comeback, major economies are closely scrutinizing the subsidy schemes of other countries, and India is also facing similar scrutiny," said Abhijit Das, an international trade expert and former head of the Centre for WTO Studies, New Delhi. In June, when Prime Minister Narendra Modi and Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney met on the sidelines of the G7 Summit in Kananaskis, Canada, they agreed to revive the stalled trade talks between the two countries. The two leaders met for the first time since Carney took office following Canada's recent elections. During the meeting, both sides underscored the need to resume negotiations on an Early Progress Trade Agreement (EPTA) and take it forward with the objective of concluding a broader Comprehensive Economic Partnership Agreement (CEPA), as per a press note issued by the Prime Minister's Office (PMO) on 18 June. Trade between India and Canada stood at $8.4 billion in FY24, with India's exports at $3.85 billion and imports at $4.55 billion. In FY25, trade rose marginally to $8.77 billion, as exports increased to $4.22 billion while imports remained nearly flat at $4.55 billion, commerce ministry data showed. Exports of electronic goods stood at $173.62 million in FY23, dipped slightly to $171.54 million in FY24, before rising sharply to $214.57 million in FY25. Queries emailed to the ministries of commerce, electronics, and information technology remained unanswered till press time. To promote domestic manufacturing of semiconductors and electronic components, the government has launched key subsidy schemes. The SPECS scheme offers 25% incentive on capital expenditure for setting up or expanding manufacturing units. The PLI scheme provides 4–6% incentives on incremental sales of mobile phones and specified components, attracting major global and Indian firms. Launched in December 2021, the Semicon India Programme is a ₹76,000 crore initiative offering up to 50% fiscal support for semiconductor fabs, display fabs, OSAT units, and design-linked incentives for chip design startups.


Time of India
20 minutes ago
- Time of India
CJI recuses from hearing Justice Varma's plea
CJI BR Gavai (File photo) NEW DELHI: Chief Justice B R Gavai on Wednesday recused from hearing a petition by Allahabad high court's Justice Yashwant Varma, who has sought quashing of an in-house inquiry panel report finding him complicit in the sacks of cash discovered at his official residence on the night of March 14 when he was a judge of Delhi HC. "It would not be proper for me (a bench headed by him) to take up the matter as I was part of the administrative processes related to the judge (linked to the cash-in-kothi incident). I will list it for hearing as soon as possible," CJI Gavai said. The other members of the bench were Justices K Vinod Chandran and Joymalya Bagchi. Sibal seeks urgent hearing before LS admits Varma removal motion Justice Yashwant Varma's counsel Kapil Sibal, who in his YouTube show has already doubted the procedure adopted by the inquiry panel and questioned then CJI Sanjiv Khanna's decision to send the report to the govt along with the recommendation to initiate a removal motion, sought urgent hearing before a bench headed by CJI Gavai a day after the govt garnered signatures of more than 150 Lok Sabha MPs for the removal motion. Probably understanding the need for an expeditious hearing prior to the Lok Sabha speaker admitting the removal motion, Sibal said, "There is some urgency. Please list the HC judge's petition for hearing. The recommendation for his removal raises some important constitutional issues." In his social media panel discussion, which included former SC judge Sanjay Kishan Kaul and ex-Delhi HC judge Mukta Gupta, Sibal had said sending the in-house panel report to the govt amounted to mixing politics with a purely constitutional process. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like 15 most beautiful women in the world Undo Justice Yashwant Varma's writ petition, filed through advocate Vaibhav Niti, has questioned why Delhi Police and Delhi Fire Service personnel, who discovered the cash, did not seize it or prepare a 'panchnama' (statement of witnesses in writing corroborating the discovery of cash), which alone could have been admissible evidence. Accusing former CJI Khanna of subjecting him to media trial by uploading "unsubstantiated" material against him on the SC's official website, Justice Varma has said principles of natural justice were violated as the then CJI did not grant him a personal hearing after offering him the choice of either resigning or taking voluntary retirement in the wake of the damning report. The May 3 report of the inquiry committee was sent to the President and the PM on May 8 with the recommendation to initiate removal motion.