The Supreme Court on Monday declined to modify its September 8 order directing the ECI to issue a formal notice stating that Aadhaar will be accepted as an identity proof document for the inclusion of a voter to the revised voters' list being prepared as part of the Special Intensive Revision (SIR).
A Bench of Justices Surya Kant and Joymlaya Bagchi said the direction is only interim in nature and the issue of the document's validity as a proof is still open to be decided in the matter related to the SIR.The Court also said that other documents like ration cards and driving license are also as much susceptible to being forged as Aadhaar and the latter cannot be single out and excluded on that ground.
The Court made the remark after Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) leader and advocate Ashwini Kumar Upadhyay sought modification of the direction on the ground that Aadhaar cannot be considered as a proof of citizenship and cannot be equated with the other documents accepted by the Election Commission of India (ECI)."Driving licenses can be forged .. ration cards can be forged. Several documents can be forged. Aadhaar is to be utilize to the extent law permits," the bench said.
Upadhyay said that Aadhaar is issued to foreigners also."Please modify the order dated 8th September. Otherwise it will be disastrous," he added.However, the Court in response said "disaster or absence of disaster" will be considered by ECI. We will hear your submissions, it told the Counsel.The Court added, "We are keeping this issue open. We are not rejecting or accepting."
The Court was hearing a batch of petitions challenging the Bihar SIR exercise. It was earlier informed that 65 lakh names were dropped from the draft electoral roll published on August 1. On August 14, the Court directed the ECI to upload the list of these 65 lakh voters proposed to be deleted during the SIR.On August 22, the Court added that people excluded from the draft electoral roll can use their Aadhaar cards as ID proof to get themselves included in the voters' list. Before this, the ECI had stated that it would only accept any of eleven other ID documents for this purpose.
Today, the Court asked about the status of the SIR and decided to wait for its further progress. Senior Advocate Gopal Sankaranarayanan urged the Court to hear the case on merits of the SIR."The ECI is moving ahead with the other Sates. Since we had to a large degree addressed on the legal aspect, just give us a date today. If it is found that this is a perversion of a constitutional scheme we may press that this may not continue. There is no question of proceeding with other States and establishing fait accompli. An actual date may be given," he submitted.
Similar request was made by Senior Advocate Abhishek Manu Singhvi and other counsel appearing for the petitioners. Meanwhile, Advocate Prashant Bhushan submitted that the ECI was not complying with its own rules on disclosure. The Court asked for a compilation of the alleged violations but did not pass any direction.
Follow us
