4 months ago
2
The Supreme Court connected Wednesday (January 21, 2026) said the Election Commission of India (ECI) is blessed with the “widest discretions” but its “deviations” portion revising electoral rolls, arsenic successful the ongoing Special Intensive Revision (SIR) 2025 exercise, cannot beryllium “untrammelled oregon unregulated” successful breach of principles of earthy justness and process prescribed nether the Registration of Electors Rules of 1960.
“You person the authorization to deviate, but not by throwing retired the Rules... Form 6 has six notified documents, your SIR has 11 documents. We would telephone upon you to reply if you tin summation oregon destruct documents which are already prescribed?” Justice Joymalya Bagchi, a subordinate of the Division Bench headed by the Chief Justice of India Surya Kant, asked the ECI.
Also Read: Supreme Court proceeding connected SIR updates
Senior advocator Rakesh Dwivedi, for the ECI, submitted that the SIR 2025 was “sustainable” nether Article 324 (power of superintendence, absorption and power of ECI implicit preparing electoral rolls and conducting elections) work with Section 21(3) of the Representation of the People Act, 1950.
Section 21(3) of the Act apparel the ECI with a residuary powerfulness to nonstop a peculiar revision of the electoral rotation for immoderate constituency oregon portion of a constituency successful “such mode arsenic it whitethorn deliberation fit”.
“But a peculiar revision whitethorn impact superior consequences successful the civilian rights of a idiosyncratic who is already a voter. So, wherefore should we not expect you (the ECI) to person a process that is transparent,” Chief Justice Kant asked the ECI’s counsel.
Also Read: Augean messiness | On the SIR and the genuine voter
Mr. Dwivedi conceded that the ECI’s deviations from process indispensable clasp the Constitutional warrant of equality earlier the law, adjacent extortion of the laws enshrined successful Article 14, Constitutional norms of transparency, and easiness of voting. He, however, contended that sub-section (3) of Section 21 of the 1950 Act allowed the ECI to question beyond the prescribed limits to revise electoral rolls arsenic agelong arsenic the reasons were recorded and the process were just and just. Section 21(3) unshackled the ECI, helium said.
But Justice Bagchi drew Mr. Dwivedi’s attraction to clause (2) of Rule 25 of the 1960 Rules, which mandated that an intensive revision of the electoral rotation would see the mentation of a caller rotation successful accordance with the process prescribed nether Rules 4 to 23.
“Rule 25 puts the shackles connected you… It cannot beryllium that an authority, nevertheless high, tin beryllium untrammelled oregon unregulated…” Justice Bagchi said, leaving it hanging for Mr. Dwivedi to grasp the court’s enactment of thought.
Justice Bagchi asked whether the ECI could importune that it would not look astatine a papers prescribed successful Form 6 of the 1960 Rules during verification, and lone look astatine the 11 documents.
The ECI had excluded the Aadhaar paper from the 11 indicative documents prescribed successful its June 24, 2025 bid declaring the SIR exercise. The tribunal had intervened successful the contented successful the midst of the Bihar SIR exercise, and ordered Aadhaar’s inclusion.
“The mode of behaviour (revision of electoral rolls) indispensable beryllium successful conformity with the principles of earthy justice. It should beryllium conscionable and fair,” Chief Justice Kant remarked.
Mr. Dwivedi argued that sub-section (3) of Section 21 was a measurement up from the preceding sub-section (2) of the 1950 Act. Sub-section (2) provided the ECI with the authorization to clasp a revision of the electoral rotation earlier an election.
Justice Bagchi said the proviso of summary revisions successful the 1950 Act was a manifestation of the Parliament’s wisdom, arsenic determination was changeless movement/migration of the colonisation successful the aboriginal years aft Independence. There was a batch of flux then, helium said. The Parliament knew it would instrumentality immoderate years for the colonisation to settle.
