Supreme Court Questions Timing and Process of EC’s Special Electoral Roll Revision in Bihar
In a significant development, the #SupremeCourt on Thursday raised strong concerns over the timing and methodology of the Election Commission of India’s (ECI) ongoing special intensive revision of electoral rolls in poll-bound #Bihar.
The move, which comes months before the state is expected to go to the polls in November, has sparked a legal and political debate, drawing scrutiny from the judiciary and criticism from opposition parties.
The apex court’s division bench—comprising Justice Sudhanshu Dhulia and Justice Joymalya Bagchi—was hearing multiple petitions challenging the special revision exercise.
The petitioners included prominent political leaders like Trinamool Congress MP Mahua Moitra, RJD MP Manoj Jha, activist Yogendra Yadav, and the Association for Democratic Reforms. They were represented by senior advocates Abhishek Manu Singhvi and Kapil Sibal.
During the proceedings, the bench underscored the fundamental importance of the right to vote, which it described as going to the root of a functioning democracy. Justice Dhulia, in particular, questioned the EC’s exclusion of critical identity documents such as the #Aadhaar card, PAN card, and driving licence from the list of acceptable proofs for electoral registration.
“Given that Aadhaar is widely used and accepted in numerous other official processes—such as for issuing caste certificates—why has the ECI decided to exclude it here?” asked Justice Dhulia. He went on to state in the order that, “It would be in the interest of justice if #Aadhaar, EPIC (Electoral Photo Identity Card), and ration cards are included as valid documents during the revision of rolls.”
Justice Joymalya Bagchi, echoing this view, pointed out that the enumeration list drawn up by the EC was deeply tied to identity verification and thus the exclusion of Aadhaar lacked clear justification. “If Aadhaar is a valid proof under Section 23 and has been constitutionally upheld, why is the ECI opposing its use with such rigidity?” Justice Bagchi questioned.
Senior advocate #KapilSibal launched a scathing critique of the exercise, arguing that the ECI was stepping outside its constitutional boundaries. “This is not just voter verification; it is a veiled attempt at #citizenship screening, which the Election Commission has no authority to conduct,” Sibal asserted.
He further added, “Who gives them the right to decide who is a citizen? This is shocking. They cannot make voting contingent upon form-filling exercises that ordinary people may not understand or be able to complete.”
#AbhishekManuSinghvi too lambasted the process, warning that it risked mass disenfranchisement. “Disenfranchising even one voter undermines the very foundation of our democratic structure. What we are witnessing here is an attempt to requalify citizenship through bureaucratic means,” he said.
In response, the bench directed some pointed queries to the ECI’s counsel, senior advocate Rakesh Dwivedi. Among the questions: Was the Commission coordinating this large-scale revision with the upcoming elections? And, would excluding Aadhaar not result in many eligible voters being dropped from the rolls?
The petitioners argued that this new verification drive was not just administrative—it had political undertones and legal overreach. They maintained that ten previous elections had been held on the basis of what now was being implied to be faulty data, and if that were the case, then the foundation of past democratic processes would also come under question.
