Bihar Assembly Elections: Supreme Court warns of intervention if voter roll shows mass exclusion
Supreme Court
on Tuesday said that it would "immediately step in" if it finds "
mass exclusion
" of voters in the ongoing
Special Intensive Revision
(SIR) of
electoral rolls
in Bihar.
A division bench comprising Justices Surya Kant and Joymalya Bagchi assured immediate "intervention" by the top court if the draft electoral roll, slated to be published on August 1 as part of SIR carried out by the Election Commission of India (ECI), reveals mass exclusion of voters.
Explore courses from Top Institutes in
Please select course:
Select a Course Category
Others
Data Analytics
Degree
Management
Design Thinking
Public Policy
MBA
Operations Management
Technology
others
Leadership
PGDM
Finance
Digital Marketing
Data Science
Product Management
healthcare
Healthcare
Cybersecurity
MCA
Artificial Intelligence
Project Management
CXO
Data Science
Skills you'll gain:
Duration:
16 Weeks
Indian School of Business
CERT-ISB Transforming HR with Analytics & AI India
Starts on
undefined
Get Details
Skills you'll gain:
Duration:
7 Months
S P Jain Institute of Management and Research
CERT-SPJIMR Exec Cert Prog in AI for Biz India
Starts on
undefined
Get Details
Skills you'll gain:
Duration:
9 months
IIM Lucknow
SEPO - IIML CHRO India
Starts on
undefined
Get Details
Skills you'll gain:
Duration:
28 Weeks
MICA
CERT-MICA SBMPR Async India
Starts on
undefined
Get Details
The bench sought to allay the apprehensions of the petitioners who argued that as many as 65 lakh voters have been excluded on the ground that either they are dead or have permanently shifted their place of residence. "Your apprehension is 65 lakh odd voters will not feature. ECI is seeking correction vis-a-vis 2025 entry. We're overviewing the thing as a judicial authority. If there is mass exclusion, we will immediately step in. You bring 15 people saying they are alive, yet have been excluded, we will intervene," the bench verbally told the petitioners.
The SC further said that the political parties should act as NGOs at this time to render their assistance in the process being undertaken ahead of assembly elections in Bihar scheduled to be held in November. Appearing on behalf of a petitioner, Advocate Prashant Bhushan said that the ECI has issued a press release stating 65 lakh are either deceased or have permanently shifted. Senior advocate Kapil Sibal, appearing on behalf of another petitioner, argued that only ECI knew who the said 65 lakh people were. He added that it would help the cause of the petitioners if ECI mentions the name of the said 65 lakh in the draft list. The bench said, if the draft list is conspicuously silent, it can be brought to court's notice.
On the other hand, the counsel for ECI submitted that once objections to the exclusion of names are considered, the real picture would emerge as to who has been excluded. He added that "people are entitled to object. 30 days' time has been given to file objections. The petitioners should assist in having the names added".
Live Events
Speaking for the bench, Justice Kant verbally remarked that ECI is a constitutional institution, and the presumption was it would act "perfectly in accordance with the law". Justice Kant added, "If someone omitted as dead comes and says, 'I am very much alive', we will intervene."
The SC has posted the matter for resumed hearing on August 12 and 13 when it would primarily deal with issues regarding the draft electoral roll.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Time of India
18 minutes ago
- Time of India
Have 'atom bomb' to prove EC is helping BJP steal votes, says Rahul
. NEW DELHI: Congress functionary Rahul Gandhi Friday said his party has collected "atom bomb" of evidence to prove that EC is helping BJP steal votes, stepping up his attack on "vote chori" on a day he led the joint opposition in writing to Lok Sabha Speaker demanding an immediate discussion on the review of electoral rolls in Bihar. The opposition told Speaker that the issue has a direct bearing on the "right to vote" and "conduct of free and fair elections", and merits an urgent debate. Talking about Congress' probe, likely about voters' list for Bangalore Rural LS seat, Rahul told reporters, "What we found is atom bomb; I mean EC will be blown away when that atom bomb explodes". The opposition's letter to Om Birla - signed by Congress, DMK, NCP-SP, RSP, SS-UBT, SP, TMC and RJD - expressed serious concern over the Bihar poll roll revision being done just before elections. It said EC has also announced the exercise will be done nationally, despite apprehensions about "transparency, timing and intent of process". The letter said the opposition had on several occasions listed a discussion on SIR as a priority, but the Modi govt has not notified a date yet. As he doubled down on his allegations, Rahul warned that officials involved in the "theft" will not be spared. "...because you are working against India, which is treason. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like Family Adopted A New 'Dog', But When The Vet Sees It He Calls The Police Undo Remember, wherever you are, whether retired or whatever, we will find you," he said. Rahul argued that Congress had suspicions after assembly polls in MP, which solidified after LS polls, and were further deepened with Maharashtra contest last year. Since EC was not helping with voters' lists, the party conducted its own deep dive into voters data. Meanwhile, BJP Friday took a swipe at Rahul's "atom bomb" claim, asking him to "flow like water" instead of "exploding like a bomb". "If they explode a bomb, we will save Constitution," said BJP spokesperson Sambit Patra. He said the Opposition speaks of such things because they have no faith in democracy.
Time of India
an hour ago
- Time of India
List steps you plan against betting apps, SC asks government
. NEW DELHI: Expressing serious concern over the deleterious impact of addictive betting applications on youth, the Supreme Court on Friday asked the Centre to respond in two weeks what steps it is contemplating to save youngsters from getting financially ruined, often forcing them to commit suicide. A bench of Justices Surya Kant and Joymalya Bagchi asked the counsel for Centre to specify in its affidavit "what remedial measures it is contemplating after applying mind to the gravity of the issue". The counsel said another bench is examining whether these apps are akin to gambling, requiring them to be banned, and the decision in that case would have a direct bearing on reliefs sought in a PIL filed by K A Paul. But the bench said, "You (the Centre) do not appear to take the problem seriously". The judges also issued notices to some states, RBI, ED, TRAI, Google India, Apple India, Dream11 and other gaming companies to file responses in two weeks. The petitioner had sought a complete ban on illegal betting apps and strict regulation of online gaming and fantasy sports, alleging these are being popularised by film stars, famous cricketers and other celebrities and end up drawing youth to the apps like moths to a flame. He said the more than 150-year-old Public Gambling Act, 1867, is unable to deal with the menace. Over 24 incidents of suicide have been reported from Telangana alone in the last one and a half years and are directly linked to debt traps created by gambling/betting platforms.
Hindustan Times
2 hours ago
- Hindustan Times
Second US appeals court open to blocking Trump's birthright citizenship order
By Nate Raymond Second US appeals court open to blocking Trump's birthright citizenship order -U.S. President Donald Trump's order restricting birthright citizenship appeared on Friday to be headed toward being declared unconstitutional by a second federal appeals court, as judges expressed deep skepticism about a key piece of his hardline immigration agenda. A three-judge panel of the Boston-based 1st U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals sharply questioned a lawyer with the U.S. Department of Justice as to why they should overturn two lower-court judges who blocked the order from taking effect. Those lower-court judges include one in Boston who last week reaffirmed his prior decision to block the order's enforcement nationally, even after the U.S. Supreme Court in June curbed the power of judges to broadly enjoin that and other policies. The San Francisco-based 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals last week became the first federal appeals court to hold Trump's order is unconstitutional. Its ultimate fate will likely be determined by the U.S. Supreme Court. Justice Department attorney Eric McArthur said on Friday that the citizenship clause of the U.S. Constitution's 14th Amendment, which was ratified in 1868 after the U.S. Civil War, rightly extended citizenship to the children of newly-freed enslaved Black people. "It did not extend birthright citizenship as a matter of constitutional right to the children of aliens who are present in the country temporarily or unlawfully," he said. But the judges questioned how that argument was consistent with the Supreme Court's 1898 ruling interpreting the clause in United States v. Wong Kim Ark, long understood as guaranteeing American citizenship to children born in the U.S. to non-citizen parents. "We have an opinion by the Supreme Court that we aren't free to disregard," said Chief U.S. Circuit Judge David Barron, who like his two colleagues was appointed by a Democratic president. Trump's executive order, issued on his first day back in office on January 20, directs agencies to refuse to recognize the citizenship of U.S.-born children who do not have at least one parent who is an American citizen or lawful permanent resident, also known as a "green card" holder. Every court to consider the order's merits has declared it unconstitutional, including the three judges who halted the order's enforcement nationally. Those judges included U.S. District Judge Leo Sorokin in Boston, who ruled in favor of 18 Democratic-led states and the District of Columbia, who had swiftly challenged Trump's policy in court. "The Supreme Court has repeatedly recognized children born to individuals who are here unlawfully or who are here on a temporary basis are nonetheless birthright citizens," Shankar Duraiswamy, a lawyer for New Jersey, argued on Friday. The 6-3 conservative majority U.S. Supreme Court on June 27 sided with the administration in the litigation by restricting the ability of judges to issue so-called universal injunctions and directing lower courts that had blocked Trump's policy nationally to reconsider the scope of their orders. But the ruling contained exceptions, allowing federal judges in Massachusetts and New Hampshire and the 9th Circuit to issue new decisions stopping Trump's order from taking effect nationally. The rulings on appeal to the 1st Circuit were issued by Sorokin and the New Hampshire judge, who originally issued a narrow injunction but more recently issued a new decision in a recently-filed class action blocking Trump's order nationwide. This article was generated from an automated news agency feed without modifications to text.
