
Yogendra Yadav appears in Supreme Court with 2 voters declared dead in Bihar SIR, ‘drama,' says Election Commission
Yadav, who addressed the Bench of Justices Surya Kant and Joymalya Bagchi in person, said that the names of these two people do not appear in the electoral rolls because they have been declared dead.
"Please see them. These are declared as dead. They don't appear. But they are alive...see them," Yadav told the Court during the hearing of a batch of petitions challenging the Bihar SIR, legal news website Bar and Bench reported.
Yadav is one of the petitioners in the case.
Senior Advocate Rakesh Dwivedi, appearing for the Election Commission of India, termed the submission a "drama". Justice Bagchi said that this may have been an inadvertent error.
"May have been an inadvertent error. Can be corrected. But your points are well taken," the judge said. Yadav, however, said that the SIR, by design, was leading to mass exclusion.
"Vast exclusion has already begun...exclusion is much more than 65 lakhs. This is not a failure of implementation of SIR, but because of the fact that wherever you implement SIR, the result will be the same," Yadav said.
Yadav also said that people have never been asked to submit their forms in a revision exercise in the country's history.
"If it was done in 2003, the other side should point it out," he said, adding that the SIR had not led to any additions. This was an exercise in intensive deletion, he claimed.
"What was special in 2003 was that SIR was done apart from the word 'intensive' being used. This is the first exercise in the history of the country where revision has taken place with zero additions. Zero additions."
Yadav called the entire process "dreadful" and said that the SIR was the largest exercise of disenfranchisement.
"We also have confirmation that women have deleted more than men. 31 lakh women have been deleted...25 lakh men have been deleted," he added. Yadav also pointed to two people within the courtroom who were allegedly declared dead by the electoral authorities.
"The figure is bound to cross 1 crore. This is not an issue of revision. Please see them. These are declared as dead. They don't appear. But they are alive...see them," he said.
The Supreme Court, during the hearing, called the special intensive revision (SIR) row in poll-bound Bihar "largely a trust deficit issue' as the Election Commission of India (ECI) claimed roughly 6.5 crore people of the total 7.9 crore voting population didn't have to file any documents for them or their parents featured in the 2003 electoral roll.
During the hearing, a bench of Justices Surya Kant and Joymalya Bagchi remarked that it "largely appears to be a case of trust deficit, nothing else' as it questioned the petitioners challenging the Election Commission's 24 June decision to conduct the SIR on the ground that it would disenfranchise one crore voters.
"If out of 7.9 crore voters, 7.24 crore voters responded to the SIR, it demolishesthe theory of one crore voters missing or disenfranchised," the bench told senior advocate Kapil Sibal, appearing for petitioner and RJD Member of Parliament Manoj Jha.
These are declared as dead. They don't appear. But they are alive...see them.
Sibal, during the hearing, said that while in one constituency, contrary to the poll panel's claims, 12 people declared dead were found alive, in another instance, alive persons were declared dead.
At the end of today's hearing, Justice Kant thanked Yadav for his assistance and 'analysis'. The hearing will continue on Wednesday.
(With inputs from LiveLaw, Bar and Bench)
Hashtags

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


The Hindu
8 minutes ago
- The Hindu
Supreme Court stray dog hearing LIVE: Three-judge Bench to take up issue today
The Supreme Court listed a case regarding community dogs before a three-judge Bench headed by Justice Vikram Nath on Thursday (August 14, 2025). Also Read | Shelter or vaccinate: Before deciding, India must count its stray dogs accurately The move has happened in the backdrop of an August 11 order by a Division Bench headed by Justice J.B. Pardiwala directing Delhi NCR authorities to round up or catch stray dogs from the capital's streets and detain them in shelters within six to eight weeks, never to be let out in public spaces again. Editorial | Dogs and laws: On street dogs and the Supreme Court order On Wednesday (August 13, 2025), a lawyer briefed Chief Justice of India B.R. Gavai about a May 9, 2024, order to treat stray canines with compassion. The CJI had agreed to list the case after this oral mentioning. Meanwhile, animal lovers demanded the withdrawal of a Supreme Court order. Holding placards reading 'Independence Day, for Whom?', the demonstrators included activists, volunteers, NCP (SP) spokesperson Anish Gawande, activist Rai Manvi, and Ambika Shukla, founder of People for Animals and sister of former Union Minister and animal rights activist Maneka Gandhi.


Scroll.in
8 minutes ago
- Scroll.in
What the outrage over stray dogs says about the moral compass of middle-class Indians
The emotional response that followed the Supreme Court ordering the removal of all stray dogs in the National Capital Region is a grim reflection on the moral priorities of India's middle-class. On August 11, the Supreme Court instructed the Delhi government and civic bodies to house stray dogs in shelters and said that animals must not be allowed back on to the streets. Soon, an Instagram post on how the ruling would deprive stray dogs of freedom and shelter had reached a million shares. Animal rights activists and citizens mobilised protests in multiple cities. Such an expression of empathy and solidarity, in barely two days, is astonishing. It is in stark contrast to the usual enabling hush over instances like, to name just a few: the detention of Indians in centres across Assam over disputed citizenship, the forced expulsion of Bengali-speaking Muslims accused of being 'Bangladeshis' and Rohingya refugees, and the illegal bulldozing of Muslim homes. Instead, these incidents have been cheered on or justified as necessary for 'national' security. It is tempting to dismiss the outrage over stray dogs as an instance of misplaced priorities or to accuse people of caring about animals more than humans. But human suffering, particularly when it is caused by poverty, war, casteism, racism or displacement, is politically messy. It implicates power structures, governments and entrenched hierarchies. To acknowledge it fully would require one to confront their own privilege, complicity and ideological alignments. Animal suffering is perceived as morally 'clean'. Stray dogs become 'pure' victims: voiceless, without political agency and incapable of being blamed for their condition. They are easier to empathise with because that empathy carries no political risk. Instead of confronting the grave injustices of our times, the Indian middle class has chosen 'safe empathy' – compassion that enables them to feel moral without challenging the status quo. Animal rights activists scuffled with police & were detained during a protest against the relocation of stray dogs near Hanuman Mandir in Connaught Place. The rally was billed as a 'Chakka Jam for Our Stray Babies' Photos by Ankit Roy @photojournalog #ThePrintPictures — ThePrintIndia (@ThePrintIndia) August 12, 2025 The silence on Gaza Consider Gaza. It has been nearly two years of Israel's military assault on the blockaded strip since October 2023. Relentless bombardment has reduced vast stretches of Gaza to rubble, destroyed health, education and water sanitation infrastructure with a death toll of 61,000 as of August – many of the dead are children. Israel has choked aid to the strip, causing a man-made famine that is claiming more lives. The very possibility of life itself has been deliberately strangled. It is widely recognised as an ongoing genocide. India's official stance has long been in support of Palestinian statehood. In December, the Ministry of External Affairs told Parliament that it is concerned about the situation in Gaza and that it has emphasised the need to safely deliver humanitarian assistance. But barring isolated instances of protests, which were quickly cracked down upon, there has been little public outrage in India over the situation in Gaza. When the Communist Party of India (Marxist) sought to hold protests in solidarity with Gaza, the Bombay High Court was critical: 'You are looking at Gaza and Palestine while neglecting what's happening here,' the court said in July, according to The Hindu. A few weeks later in August, the court allowed the party to hold a 'peaceful assembly'. 'Demonstration sounds more intense,' said a judge. The judiciary is the same institution that Indian liberals will turn to, seeking protection for stray dogs. #Breaking: Mumbai Police permits Communist Party of India (Marxist) to hold a peaceful protest to condemn the ongoing genocide in Gaza. Bombay High Court division bench of Justices Ravindra Ghuge and Gautam Ankhad accepted the statement made by the Mumbai Police that the… — Live Law (@LiveLawIndia) August 12, 2025 But political solidarity with Palestine would have meant confronting Hindutva's alliance with Zionism and the broader Islamophobia that underpins public discourse. Similarly, there has been silence when it comes to India's own Muslim population. Indian citizens were among those illegally pushed into Bangladesh after the police, especially in Bharatiya Janata Party-ruled states, rounded up Bengali-speaking Muslims and demanded proof of Indian citizenship following the Pahalgam terror attack. Elsewhere, Muslims have been lynched for their religious identity and visibility, their homes illegally bulldozed in defiance of Supreme Court orders, their businesses boycotted and their places of worship demolished. Hindutva parties and their supporters have actively celebrated these acts as furthering the establishment of a Hindu nation. But the tragedy and the hypocrisy is that much of the liberal and centrist middle-class has also either justified this violence under the garb of 'law and order' or looked away, unwilling to confront majoritarian hatred. It is a court order against stray dogs that suddenly awakens public conscience. When the victims are Muslim, whether in Palestine or in India, liberal outrage collapses into moral cowardice or polite distance. For Gaza, the refrain was that 'it's too complex' or 'too far away' to take a stance. Complexity, however, was not an obstacle when it came to stray dogs in Delhi – an issue that demands balancing human safety with empathy for animals while addressing administrative failures. Animal right activists for a noble cause are having a candle light march on Kartavya Path New Delhi against the Supreme Courts orders on Stray dogs in the capital — Ravinder Kapur. (@RavinderKapur2) August 13, 2025 Convenient empathy Advocating for animals rarely attracts the kind of social or political backlash that campaigning against caste violence, Islamophobia, or settler colonialism does. One can campaign for stray dogs without worrying about losing a job, alienating their family, or facing state surveillance. Fighting for oppressed humans has real consequences. The path of least resistance becomes the path most travelled. The mainstream media and nonprofits know this. They package animal welfare stories accordingly: apolitical, emotionally accessible and with feel-good sentiment – 'adopt, don't shop'. Reporting on caste atrocities, religious hatred, or settler colonialism, on the other hand, demands naming perpetrators and acknowledging systemic injustice, which makes audiences uncomfortable. This discomfort is evident in the silence and selective outrage of India's liberal class. There is also an undercurrent of cynicism and misanthropy. Many have internalised the belief that humans are inherently selfish, corrupt and unworthy of trust, a belief shaped by personal betrayals or repeated exposure to systemic injustice. Animals, in contrast, are idealised as loyal, honest and incapable of malice. This makes animal advocacy emotionally safer; one can help without fear of ingratitude or manipulation. But this cynicism feeds political disengagement. If humans are 'hopeless', the incentive to fight for them disappears. This belief serves the interests of oppressive systems, as it channels moral energy into spaces that pose no threat to power. None of this is to argue against caring for animals. Empathy is not a finite resource. Protecting stray dogs from cruelty is important. But empathy that does not extend to fellow humans is an empathy shaped and limited by blind privilege. The legal and political systems that abandon stray dogs are the same ones that let poor families starve, imprison minorities without trial and support genocide abroad. The outrage over the Supreme Court's stray dog order has shown that mass empathy can be mobilised quickly, creatively and with impact. If the liberal Hindu middle-class can find its voice for stray dogs within 48 hours, its silence on human suffering is a deliberate choice, not an oversight. Real solidarity requires dismantling the hierarchy of empathy that places animals above humans when human beings are politically inconvenient. It means recognising that the fight for animal welfare and the fight for human dignity are bound by the same thread: resistance to cruelty, exploitation and systemic neglect. Severing that connection allows the oppressor to define the limits of compassion. Until that selective and comfortable activism changes, every candle lit for a stray dog will cast a shadow long enough to hide the silence and complicity in majoritarian hatred – at home and beyond.


Hans India
38 minutes ago
- Hans India
TG BJP lauds apex court's decision to transfer lawyer couple murder case to CBI
Hyderabad: Telangana BJP President N. Ramchander Rao has welcomed the Supreme Court's decision to hand over the investigation of the 2021 murder of advocate couple Gattu Vaman Rao and P. V. Nagamani to the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI). He said on Wednesday the verdict reflects growing public distrust in the state's investigative agencies and will help restore faith in the judicial system. The lawyer couple was brutally murdered in broad daylight in Peddapalli district, triggering widespread outrage and raising serious concerns about the safety of legal professionals in the state. The Apex Court's decision to transfer the case to the CBI is seen as a significant step toward ensuring justice and accountability. Rao said that the CBI probe would uncover the full facts of the case and ensure that those responsible face strict punishment. He also reiterated his long-standing demand for the introduction of an Advocate Protection Act to safeguard lawyers from such attacks. 'As a former MLC, I had repeatedly urged the previous government to enact the Advocate Protection Act, but the demand was ignored,' Rao said. He called on the current Congress-led state government to fulfill its election manifesto promise and introduce the legislation in the upcoming assembly session. Rao stressed that protecting the legal community is the government's responsibility and affirmed that the BJP would continue to advocate for justice, dignity, and security for lawyers. He said the Supreme Court's intervention should serve as a warning to those who threaten or attack legal professionals and reaffirmed the party's commitment to legal reforms and institutional accountability.