Bihar SIR: What the Supreme Court's interim order means for voter rights
A Bench of Justices Surya Kant and Joymalya Bagchi ordered that the list must specify the precise reasons for exclusion, such as death, migration, or duplicate registration. The petitioners have argued that the poll body has failed to observe the basic principles of natural justice while carrying out the exercise. They have also questioned the 'hasty' manner of its implementation.
What is the constitutionality of the SIR exercise, and does it risk disenfranchising voters? What are the implications of the interim order? To what extent does the order address the contentious debate over whether Aadhaar can serve as valid proof of identity and residence in the electoral process?
Guest: Shahrukh Alam, advocate practising at the Supreme Court
Host: Aaratrika Bhaumik
Shot, produced and edited by Jude Francis Weston
For more In Focus episodes:
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Indian Express
10 minutes ago
- Indian Express
‘Toll on citizens' purse and patience': Supreme Court slams NHAI, upholds Kerala HC order suspending toll
The Supreme Court Monday upheld the Kerala High Court's view that the public cannot be forced to pay user fee for roads which are in a state of disrepair, and pointed out that citizens bear the brunt of such roads, which also affects the environment and leads to a wastage of fuel. A bench of Chief Justice of India B R Gavai, K Vinod Chandran, and N V Anjaria said this while dismissing the appeal filed by the National Highways Authority of India (NHAI) against the Kerala High Court's August 6 judgement. In the judgment, the high court suspended the toll collection for four weeks at Paliyekkara in Thrissur district along the stretch of the National Highway 544, where the roads are in a poor condition. 'We cannot but agree with the reasoning of the High Court that the 'obligation of the public to pay a user fee under statutory provisions is premised on the assurance that their use of the road will be free from hindrances',' the bench said, citing the HC order. The bench added from the August 6 order, which also said, 'When the public is legally bound to pay a user fee, they simultaneously acquire a corresponding right to demand unhindered, safe, and regulated access to the road. Any failure on the part of the National Highways Authority or its agents to ensure such access constitutes a breach of the public's legitimate expectations and undermines the very basis of the toll regime'. The bench said the cost of constructing roads under the Build, Operate, Transfer (BOT) model is collected from people using it, despite having already paid motor vehicle tax. 'In a democracy, roads are laid on Build Operate and Transfer contracts to ensure that the cost is collected from the users, when motor vehicle tax is remitted for their use on roads, it is a sad reflection of the free market. That the successful bidder extracts much more than what is spent on construction and maintenance is a comedy of errors,' Justice Chandran said, writing for the bench. 'That the roads fall into disrepair due to vagaries of nature and often rank neglect, is the stark reality. That the toll collectors at the booths, often due to understaffing and overwork, behave like satraps, is a fact of life. That the poor citizen is bound to wait for hours, in a queue, and in a cramped space, with the engine running but hardly moving, is a tragedy. That the toll is really on the purse and the patience of the citizen, as also the environment, is the downside,' said Justice Chandran. On the condition of the said stretch of National Highway 544, the bench said, 'We are also surprised that the further constructions on the road, constructed on BOT basis is entrusted to another Contractor, when the obligation to maintain the entire stretch is on the Concessionaire under the BOT agreement; on which we speak no further, since it is the commercial wisdom of the NHAI.' Refusing to interfere with the Kerala HC order, the top court said, 'We are convinced not only that the order be sustained, but the Division Bench also be requested to monitor the situation to ensure ease of traffic' It asked the high court's division bench to also implead the contractor who is carrying out the work on the black spots. The Supreme Court noted that NHAI had assured that the maintenance work on the service roads is proceeding on a war footing and smooth traffic would be ensured soon. 'The minute smooth traffic is resumed, the NHAI or the Concessionaire would be entitled to pray for lifting the prohibitory order, even before the four weeks as ordered by the High Court.'
Hindustan Times
10 minutes ago
- Hindustan Times
Congress now alleges electoral irregularities in Rajasthan
Congress leader Tikaram Jully on Wednesday alleged large-scale electoral irregularities in Rajasthan's Tijara, Bhiwadi, and Alwar constituencies, claiming voting patterns showed clear signs of manipulation. He said they were gathering documents showing how voting percentages spiked abnormally after 5pm during the 2024 national and 2023 assembly polls. He said multiple voters were registered at the same addresses. Congress said outsiders managed to get their names added to the voter list. (X) The fresh allegations came days after the Election Commission of India (ECI) on Sunday called the Opposition's 'vote theft' charges during the 2024 Lok Sabha elections and discrepancies in the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of Bihar's electoral roll false and baseless. Congress leader Rahul Gandhi is undertaking a 1,300-km Voter Adhikari Yatra in Bihar against the ECI and the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP)'s alleged 'conspiracy' to steal the Bihar assembly polls. Jully said outsiders managed to get their names added to the voter list in Bhiwadi and vote. 'Whenever questions were raised [during elections], the same complaint came were voting for one party but the vote was being recorded for the BJP symbol, the lotus. This was reported from many places.' Jully said voters in a village in his constituency pressed the button for Congress, but the votes were recorded for the BJP. '...such fraud has taken place everywhere. In Lok Sabha and assembly elections, large-scale fraud took place in Tijara and Bhiwadi. In Alwar, too, due to mismanagement, rigging occurred. All of this needs to be investigated.' Jully said the ECI acted with haste in poll-bound Bihar and revised the entire voter list within a month, and removed 6.5 million names. He called it striking that not a single new name was added. He said that if a special intensive revision of the electoral roll is also done in Rajasthan, it should be done properly. 'People should be facilitated. We do not want fake voters to be added, but genuine votes should not be removed. There are still three years left for elections in Rajasthan, so it can be done smoothly. What happened in Bihar, where everything was done in one month, is wrong. And here too, people must not be harassed unnecessarily.' He asked why a poor person would be forced to submit 20 photocopies and lose daily wages to prove their right to vote. 'The ECI must verify house-to-house and not trouble the common man.' BJP spokesperson Laxmikant Bharadwaj said Congress has lost hope of winning elections through the people's mandate. 'Just to console their workers, they are spreading lies. The public will give them an apt reply.' He said the real problem was with the Congress leadership, which they cannot change. 'Hence, they are only looking for excuses for their defeat.'
India Today
24 minutes ago
- India Today
Top court questions Governors' powers, federal harmony in handling state bills
The Supreme Court on Wednesday questioned whether the country has lived up to the expectations of the Constitution's framers regarding harmony between the governor and the state government, as well as consultation on various issues between the two power observation came from a five-judge Constitution bench headed by Chief Justice BR Gavai, during the hearing of a Presidential Reference seeking clarity on the powers and discretion of governors and the president in dealing with Bills passed by state General Tushar Mehta, appearing for the Centre, referred to the Constituent Assembly debates on the appointment and powers of governors. He argued that the post is not a political refuge for retired politicians but carries significant responsibilities under the Constitution. "Governors are not just postmen. They represent the Union of India. An individual who is not directly elected is no less than those who are," he told the emphasised that governors are expected to act with discretion, including options to pass, withhold, or refer a bill, but within the constitutional framework. He clarified that withholding a bill does not mean killing it bench, comprising Justices Surya Kant, Vikram Nath, PS Narasimha, and AS Chandurkar, engaged in a detailed discussion on Articles 200 and 201 and the federal structure envisaged by the Constitution. Justice Narsimha asked the Solicitor General to consider the constitutional use of the word "withhold", noting that it appears in multiple places in the court also explored whether governors, despite disagreeing with a bill, are obligated to exercise discretion in the first instance, or whether they have other options, with Mehta emphasising that governors have several courses of action but discretion must be exercised according to constitutional Solicitor General referred the court to Constituent Assembly debates, including remarks by Jawaharlal Nehru, highlighting that governors were envisioned as eminent individuals, sometimes from outside active politics, who could cooperate with the government while remaining slightly above party an arrangement, Mehta argued, would ensure smoother functioning of democratic machinery than if governors were entirely partisan. The court noted the influence of the American system in these debates and the ongoing litigation that has arisen from ambiguity in gubernatorial top court also addressed the long pendency of bills with governors, noting that some legislation has remained pending since 2020. Mehta submitted that imposing fixed timelines on governors and the president would amount to one organ of government assuming powers not granted by the Constitution, potentially leading to "constitutional disorder".He clarified that the government does not seek to confer absolute discretion on governors to reject bills, but rather to interpret their constitutional powers the hearing, the bench observed that the Presidential Reference would be considered in advisory jurisdiction and not appellate jurisdiction. President Droupadi Murmu had invoked Article 143(1) to seek clarity on whether judicial orders could impose timelines for the exercise of discretion by the president on bills reserved by reference followed an April 8 ruling on Bills from the Tamil Nadu Assembly, which had prescribed a three-month timeline for presidential action on Bills reserved by also walked the court through the drafting of the office of governor in the Draft Constitution, noting proposals that initially considered direct election by the highlighted the historical significance and sanctity of the governor's office, clarifying that it is not an asylum for retired politicians. He also noted that debates on provincial versus central supremacy aimed to ensure a balanced federal framework and harmonious relations between governors and elected state bench probed the practical impact of gubernatorial discretion, asking whether a government elected with a majority would be at the whims of a governor. Mehta responded that all powers are granted by the Constitution and that discretion must be exercised within legal cited examples during the COVID-19 pandemic when, irrespective of the party in power at the Centre, state governments and the PM coordinated effectively, showing how democratic functioning accommodates differing power centres while maintaining cooperation.- Ends advertisement
