&w=3840&q=100)
SC says multiple documents for citizenship in Bihar SIR are voter-friendly
Justice Joymalya Bagchi made the observation during a hearing on petitions challenging the Election Commission of India's (ECI's) June 24 directive ordering the SIR. Senior Advocate A M Singhvi, appearing for one of the petitioners, had raised concerns about the exclusionary nature of the verification exercise.
A Bench of Justices Surya Kant and Joymalya Bagchi is hearing multiple petitions contesting the ECI's directive, which mandates that voters not listed in the 2003 electoral roll must furnish documents to prove citizenship. Individuals born after December 2004 are also required to submit citizenship proof of both parents, with additional conditions if a parent is a foreign national.
The court noted that the SIR in Bihar permits any of 11 documents to be submitted to establish citizenship, whereas the earlier summary revision in Jharkhand allowed only seven documents for identity verification.
While acknowledging concerns around Aadhaar exclusion, Justice Bagchi said the broader set of documents available in Bihar makes the process 'voter-friendly rather than restrictive.'
Singhvi, however, questioned the "compelling need" to conduct the SIR in such a short timeframe, arguing that it could lead to mass voter exclusion. He pointed out that many women in Bihar lack matriculation or educational certificates issued by recognised boards, which are among the 11 approved documents.
Legal scope of ECI's powers debated
Justice Bagchi highlighted that Section 21(3) of the Representation of the People (RP) Act grants the ECI some flexibility to conduct a special revision 'in such manner as it may think fit,' subject to limitations.
He posed a question to the legal counsels on whether this provision gave the ECI 'residuary discretion' to introduce additions such as enumeration forms or extra documentation for the revision process.
Senior Advocate Gopal Sankaranarayanan, also appearing for the petitioners, countered that Section 21(3) 'cannot take away my right to adult suffrage under Article 326 at any cost,' nor the right to vote under Section 62 of the RP Act.
'This is a battle between a constitutional entitlement and a constitutional right,' Justice Bagchi remarked.
Allegations of EC website changes after Rahul Gandhi's remarks
Advocate Prashant Bhushan, representing the Association for Democratic Reforms (ADR), submitted that the ECI removed the searchable list of electoral rolls from its website after Congress leader Rahul Gandhi accused the poll body of aiding 'vote theft' on August 4.
'The searchable list was available till August 4,' Bhushan told the court.
The Bench also clarified that it would not take up matters related to the SIR in West Bengal, as the state Assembly elections are scheduled for 2026.
'Bengal can wait. Nothing is happening now,' the court said.
The hearing is expected to continue on Thursday.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Economic Times
18 minutes ago
- Economic Times
Same-sex couple moves court against Income Tax Act
A same-sex couple has challenged a discriminatory tax law in Bombay High Court. The couple argues that the law unfairly taxes gifts between same-sex partners. Heterosexual couples do not face this tax burden. The petitioners claim this violates constitutional rights. The court admitted the petition and will notify the Attorney General. The LGBTQIA+ community is closely watching the case. Tired of too many ads? Remove Ads Tired of too many ads? Remove Ads 'The love that dare not speak its name' spoke up against an 'uneven' tax code on Thursday morning at Room number 6 of the Bombay High Court, a theatre of many epic legal battles. A same-sex couple, in a relationship for years, has moved the court, challenging the law that discriminates against them by taxing the gifts received by one partner from the Income Tax Act, no such tax on gifts is levied for a heterosexual couple, even if the partners are not formally married but are presumed to be in a marriage. They are not taxed simply because they have the possibility of getting to the petitioners, such unequal economic treatment to same-sex couples, who may be in a long, stable relationship, would amount to a denial of the equal protection of the law on the basis of sex --- a form of discrimination prohibited by Articles 14 and 15 of the Constitution of the petition, the bench comprising Justice and Firdoush Pooniwalla said the court would send a notice to the Attorney General as it raises a constitutional petitioners, Payio Ashiho, a homemaker, and his partner Vivek Divan, a lawyer who had practised at the High Court and worked at the UN headquarters, were represented by Advocate Dr Dhruv to curb tax evasion, Section 56(2)(x) of the IT Act taxes any money, property, or other assets received without adequate consideration if their value exceeds Rs 50,000. Such receipts or gifts are categorised as 'income from other sources'. However, as per the fifth proviso to Section 56(2)(x), such gifts are not treated as 'income from other sources' and therefore not taxed, when received from 'relatives', which also includes 'spouses' (a term that the statute does not separately explain).Unlike the partners in a heterosexual couple, the petitioners are unable to claim tax benefit as they would not legally qualify as 'spouses' as they belong to the same petition challenges the constitutional validity of the explanation to the fifth proviso to Section 56(2)(x) of the Act, insofar as it discriminates against same-sex couples in taxing gifts received from one partner to petitioners have prayed before the court, (1) to declare the reference to the term 'spouse' as unconstitutional in so far as it excludes same-sex couples in the same circumstances; (2) to declare that the particular proviso is applicable to same-sex couples in a long, stable relationship; (3) restrain tax authorities from carrying out reassessment and imposing penalties relating to transactions between the petitioners. It may be pointed out that the petitioners neither seek recognition nor presumption of outcome of the proceedings, according to legal circles, would be closely followed by the LGBTQIA+ community as it could have a bearing on investments, property ownerships, and some legal victories, community members, often voicing the discriminations they encounter, believe they still have a long way to go in preserving their dignity and freedom. While in 2018, the apex court had decriminalised same-sex relationship by scrapping a colonial era law, in 2023, a five-member Supreme Court bench declined to recognise LGBTQIA+ persons' right to marry under the Special Marriage Act, K Singh, managing partner of law firm Capstone Legal said For such a prayer to be granted, an expansive reading of the word 'spouse' is required to be considered by the Court.'However, the biggest bottleneck would be the fact that no legal provision in India recognises the rights of same sex couples,' said Singh.
Indian Express
20 minutes ago
- Indian Express
Democracy is dying at SC's doorstep, says Uddhav, urges CJI to take care of it
Democracy is dying at the doorstep of Supreme Court, said Shiv Sena (UBT) president and former Chief Minister Uddhav Thackeray on Thursday, and requested the Chief Justice of India to take care of it. He was speaking at a conclave held by the Opposition parties and civil society organisations against the state government's recently passed Maharashtra Special Public Security Bill. 'Yesterday (Wednesday), the Chief Justice agreed to refer the case of stray dogs to a bigger bench and give it a hearing. The dogs of Delhi are getting a hearing… You all know that cases regarding Shiv Sena and NCP are pending at the Supreme Court. What we are getting is date after date. I have said this earlier and am saying it again. Democracy is dying at your (SC) doorstep and I request you to please take care of it. If democracy is saved, people are saved and then dogs too would be saved,' said Thackeray. Questioning the meaning of 'Left extremism' as mentioned in the bill, Thackeray said had it been against terrorists and traitors, he would have supported it. 'Hang them (terrorist and traitors) irrespective of their caste, creed or religion. Is there a mention of terrorists or traitors in this bill? Had it been against them, we would have supported it,' said Thackeray. He mentioned that the existing laws are being used selectively, giving the example of arrest of Vasai-Virar municipal Corporation official for possession of cash and letting go of Eknath Shinde-led Shiv Sena minister Sanjay Shirsat who was seen with bag of cash in a video that went viral on social media a month ago. Maharashtra Congress Chief Harshvardhan Sapkal said, 'This bill is a brainchild of a power hungry Chief Minister who wants to implement the ideology presented in Bunch of Thoughts (a book written by former RSS head MS Golawalkar). This is nothing but an attempt by the CM to impress his party leadership to overpower the possible power battle against the Uttar Pradesh Chief Minister.' Earlier, Nationalist Congress Party (SP) president Sharad Pawar said that the Maharashtra Special Public Security Bill will trample on people's freedom of expression. Pawar conceded that the bill was not opposed effectively when it was introduced in the legislative Assembly last month by the BJP-led government, but added that the necessary course correction was done in the legislative council. Maharashtra state secretary of CPM Ajit Navale said that all political parties across ideologies have come together with one aim. 'The aim is to ensure withdrawal of this bill. And I am confident that we will achieve it unitedly,' said Navale. Social activist Ulka Mahajan said that a three-step agitation path will be followed against the bill. She said that agitation will be held on September 10 across Maharashtra against the bill. 'At least one public rally will be held in each constituency of Opposition legislators and we will also take the bill to the court,' said Mahajan.
The Hindu
20 minutes ago
- The Hindu
Bihar SIR: Rationalisation of polling stations, change in BLOs spark confusion on ground
Amid the ongoing Special Intensive Revision of electoral rolls in Bihar, the Election Commission of India (ECI) has carried out rationalisation and reorganisation of polling stations in the entire State, a move which political parties claim has added to the confusion on the ground. The number of polling stations in the State has now gone up from 77,895 to 90,712. This has been done to adhere to the SIR order of June 24, which had directed that the number of voters in each polling station be limited to 1,200 from the earlier ceiling of 1,500. The ECI has said that Bihar is the first State to implement this new ceiling of voters for each polling station. However, the ECI, instead of numbering the new booths separately, has given fresh numbers to all the booths. In addition, the Booth Level Officers (BLOs) in charge of each polling station have been reassigned, according to the new numbering. This, coupled with the fact that the rationalisation process was implemented on July 26, after the first phase of SIR was over, has meant that the BLOs who collected the enumeration forms in the first phase would not be the ones handling the claims and objections from voters. Political workers as well as voters on the ground said that many a time, the BLO who had collected the form was not available to answer their concerns regarding deletion of names, or documents that must be submitted in case a voter's booth had been changed. In a letter to District Election Officer, Begusarai, Congress district president Abhay Kumar Singh Sarjan, said: 'BLOs of newly created parts/booths have complained that much confusion has been created by this modification of existing booths during the SIR process, because they have to procure the enumeration forms and documents collected by the BLOs of older parts/booths. Such confusion [among] the BLOs has made the process of verification of deleted electors even more difficult.' Another Congress district president, Anil Singh, who heads the Chapra unit, told The Hindu: 'Some of the BLOs who have moved to new booths are not even answering calls of voters from whom they had collected their forms'. Similar concerns have been raised by parties like the Rashtriya Janata Dal and the Communist Party of India (Marxist–Leninist) as well. However, sources in the Bihar State Election Office said that polling station rationalisation was carried out in a transparent and organised manner and all political parties were informed through distribution of the new list. Public meetings were also organised, they said. The sources said that in cases where one polling station was divided into two, there was seamless data transfer between the two BLOs and since the officials are local residents, contacting them was not difficult for voters. The list of polling stations has also been pasted on each building which houses them. A senior ECI official in Delhi said that the rationalisation of polling stations was done to prevent long queues and overcrowding in booths during voting. 'Smaller booths also ensure a higher voting percentage, it has been observed,' he added.
