4 months ago
1
The Supreme Court connected Thursday (January 15, 2026) asked the Election Commission of India (ECI) a basal question which petitioners person repeatedly posed successful their situation to the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls — “Can we not safely presume that voters who person survived aggregate rotation revisions are citizens?”
The question from the Bench of Chief Justice of India Surya Kant and Joymalya Bagchi came successful the backdrop of discussions implicit a 1995 Supreme Court lawsuit law, which held that a idiosyncratic already enrolled successful the elector database should not beryllium asked to beryllium citizenship. The Lal Babu Hussain judgement saw the tribunal state that the load of impervious of citizenship would beryllium lone connected those applying for enrollment for the archetypal time.
“The presumption oregon the instauration of this lawsuit [Lal Babu Hussain] is that if my sanction appears successful the elector list, determination is simply a presumption I americium a citizen. The presumption is that an authoritative enactment [of revision] is regularly done. The elector database is prepared nether the auspices of a law authority. So, the grade of regularity of the authoritative enactment attached to a elector list, beryllium it SIR-regulated oregon prepared aft a summary revision, allows the presumption of a idiosyncratic being a citizen… This is the statement raised by the petitioners,” Justice Bagchi observed, seeking a effect from elder advocator Rakesh Dwivedi, appearing for the EC.
Mr. Dwivedi said the EC was nether a law work to find citizenship for the constricted intent of registering a idiosyncratic arsenic an elector.
“It volition not person immoderate different consequences. We nonstop the deportation of a person. We cannot accidental however agelong you whitethorn enactment successful India. We are not acrophobic whether you person a visa to enactment oregon whether you are a recognised exile oregon not. We are not acrophobic with each that,” the elder counsel submitted.
The Chief Justice said Mr. Dwivedi’s enactment of statement seemed to beryllium that the ECI would not “determine” citizenship but lone “identify” if a idiosyncratic was genuine and had a valid citizenship.
“If a idiosyncratic says I americium not a citizen, but I privation to use for citizenship and enactment successful the elections, you [EC] volition not beryllium the authorization for that. But if a idiosyncratic says I americium a citizen, and my sanction is to beryllium included successful the elector list, you person a close to clasp an enquiry to find the validity of his assertion of being a genuine citizen,” the CJI summarised.
Supreme Court questions Election Commission connected elector rotation deletions, citizenship
Justice Bagchi asked whether the exemption fixed to voters successful the Bihar SIR from producing indicative documents had meant the effacement of each the electoral rotation revisions which happened betwixt 2003 and 2025.
Mr. Dwivedi defended that the electoral rotation prepared aft a January 2025 revision was besides considered successful the Bihar SIR.
He described the SIR workout arsenic a “soft-touch, a wide approach” which did not magnitude to “scrutiny”or a “judicial inquiry”.
He said the intent of the beingness of the EC was to service voters and to heighten big suffrage.
“If your sanction is determination successful the 2003 elector list, we accepted it arsenic a probative. If the sanction was not there, which was a uncommon concern successful Bihar, we sought individuality documents, including Aadhaar… The bully happening astir SIR is that successful the aboriginal everybody volition person immoderate papers to show,” Mr. Dwivedi said.
He pointed retired that cipher retired of the 65 lakh excluded successful Bihar filed an appeal. Names were deleted due to the fact that their owners were either already dormant oregon migrated oregon successful the lawsuit of duplicate entries.
“Why bash they [petitioners] privation dormant radical to beryllium successful the elector list, treble entries. Looks similar idiosyncratic wants to exploit the situation… No elector alleging incorrect exclusion has travel to court… Our work is to maximise enfranchisement… Disenfranchisement is simply a antithetic conception from exclusion of dormant voters oregon duplicate entries from the elector list,” helium submitted.
