Will step in if there is any mass exclusion of voters in Bihar: Supreme Court

Hindustan Times

a day ago

The Supreme Court on Tuesday warned that it will 'step in' if there is any mass exclusion of voters in poll-bound Bihar, asking petitioners challenging the Election Commission of India's (ECI) special intensive revision (SIR) of electoral rolls to bring before it at least 15 individuals who have been wrongly declared dead in the draft electoral list, scheduled to be published on August 1. The Supreme Court reiterated that it would take a supervisory role as the revision process unfolds. (File/PTI)
'This is a constitutional institution. We will deem that its actions are in accordance with law. But if there is mass exclusion, we will immediately step in,' remarked a bench of justices Surya Kant and Joymalya Bagchi.
The court scheduled the next hearing for August 12 and 13, indicating that the first stage of hearings will focus on objections to the draft list, while the broader constitutional challenges to ECI's notification could be taken up in a second phase in September.
Also read: Chirag Paswar predicts Nitish's return as CM after Bihar polls, backs NDA
The court's comments came as petitioners alleged that the Commission has arbitrarily excluded or moved nearly 6.5 million voters from the rolls, either declaring them deceased or marking them as having permanently relocated. 'If you say people have been declared dead, bring 15 such people before us who are alive,' the court told the petitioners.
Senior counsel Kapil Sibal, Gopal Sankaranarayanan and advocate Prashant Bhushan, appearing for the petitioners, raised serious concerns about the transparency of the process, arguing that neither the basis nor the names of the 6.5 million voters have been publicly shared.
'How will voters even know they have been excluded unless they see the draft list? And how do they get themselves included again?' Bhushan asked. Sibal said ECI has refused to provide them with the list of names, stating that it would be available on the website.
ECI, represented by senior advocate Rakesh Dwivedi, maintained that the process remained open for additions and corrections for 30 days after publication of the draft. 'Objections are yet to be considered. The real picture will emerge only after that,' he said.
But the court remained cautious, reminding ECI of its constitutional responsibility. 'If you deviate from your own notification, of course we will interfere,' said the bench, adding that political parties should act as 'NGOs at this time' to ensure voters are included.
The court reiterated that it would take a supervisory role as the revision process unfolds. 'We are overviewing the thing as a judicial authority,' it added.
The hearing follows the court's earlier warning on Monday, when it refused to stay the publication of the August 1 draft list but emphasised that the revision process must promote en masse inclusion, not exclusion. On Monday, it also instructed ECI to treat Aadhaar and EPIC (Voter ID) cards as valid identification documents, noting that both carried a 'presumption of genuineness.'
'You proceed with Aadhaar and EPIC. Where forgery is found, act on a case-to-case basis. Any document on this earth can be forged. Instead of en masse exclusion, you should be going for en masse inclusion,' the court said then.
Similar oral directions were issued on July 10, and the petitioners on Monday told the bench that field officials were still refusing to accept Aadhaar and Voter ID cards. 'The impression on the ground is that EC officials are not accepting Aadhaar and EPIC cards,' said senior advocate Abhishek Manu Singhvi, appearing for Trinamool Congress MP Mahua Moitra.
In response, the court again reminded the ECI to comply with its oral directions and proceed with the presumption of authenticity of official documents unless specific evidence of forgery exists.
The petitions, filed by the Association for Democratic Reforms (ADR), Congress MP KC Venugopal, RJD MP Manoj Jha and others, have challenged ECI's June 24 notification that initiated a special revision of electoral rolls in Bihar under Section 21(3) of the Representation of the People Act, 1950.
The petitioners argue that the Commission's list of 11 accepted documents, excluding Aadhaar, voter IDs and ration cards, is arbitrary and lacks statutory backing. They have also questioned ECI's authority to conduct such a revision and seek proof of citizenship — functions, they argued, that are constitutionally vested in the Union government.
ECI, in its affidavit, contended that while determining foreign citizenship falls within the Union's exclusive domain, it is well within the Commission's powers to verify claims of citizenship by birth and require relevant documentation for inclusion in the electoral rolls.
The court previously observed that the case 'goes to the root of the functioning of a democratic republic' and involves the fundamental right to vote. On July 10, another bench had said it will examine three key issues — whether ECI has the power to carry out the SIR, the manner in which it is being implemented, and the timing of the exercise in light of the upcoming Bihar Assembly elections.
The draft electoral rolls for Bihar are expected to be released on August 1. The next phase in the legal battle will hinge on whether substantial numbers of legitimate voters have been excluded, and if so, whether the court should step in.