The Supreme Court on Monday refused to stay the publication of draft electoral rolls in Bihar under the Election Commission’s Special Intensive Revision (SIR) exercise, reiterating its earlier observation that Aadhaar and voter ID documents carried a “presumption of genuineness.”
Hearing pleas against the SIR drive, a Bench comprising Justices Surya Kant and Joymalya Bagchi emphasised the legal validity of both Aadhaar and voter ID as identification tools. “As far as ration cards are concerned we can say they can be forged easily, but Aadhaar and voter cards have some sanctity and have presumption of genuineness. You continue accepting these documents,” the court told the poll body.
The apex court said it would finalise the schedule for full hearings on 29 July, indicating its intent to conclusively interpret the legality of the EC’s move. The petitioners, including the NGO Association for Democratic Reforms, pressed for an interim stay on the 1 August publication of the draft rolls, but the court cited its earlier order, where no interim relief had been sought.
Senior advocate Gopal Sankaranarayanan, appearing for the NGO, submitted that the earlier assurance by the court to hear the matter before 1 August was the reason interim relief was not pressed. However, the Bench declined to stay the publication, stating, “Don’t undermine the power of the court. Trust us. If the court agrees with your submission and if any illegality is found, then this court will quash everything then and there.”
The Election Commission, in its counter affidavit, reaffirmed that Aadhaar, voter ID, and ration cards were all valid forms of identification for the SIR. However, the Bench noted its reservations about ration cards while endorsing the legal credibility of the other two.
On 10 July, a separate Bench had permitted the EC to proceed with the SIR in Bihar, with a direction to accept multiple forms of identification. The EC maintained that the SIR aimed to “weed out ineligible persons” and enhance the purity of elections.
Justice Bagchi questioned the exclusion of applicants submitting only Aadhaar, remarking that “none of the 11 documents referred for SIR are conclusive,” and called for a more inclusive approach. Justice Kant added, “Any document on earth can be forged. The election commission can deal with cases of forgery on a case-to-case basis. Instead of en masse exclusion it must be en masse inclusion.”
Senior advocate Rakesh Dwivedi, for the EC, reiterated that Aadhaar was not a proof of citizenship and the exercise was merely a revision, not a fresh registration. “Voter card was not relied upon as it was a revision exercise or else there was no use of such an exercise,” he said.
However, Sankaranarayanan cited reports suggesting that booth-level officers had not visited neighbourhoods, and in some cases had forged signatures and uploaded them on official forms.
In a rejoinder affidavit, the petitioner NGO warned that the EC’s June 24 directive could result in arbitrary disenfranchisement of large segments of Bihar’s electorate. “The SIR order, if not set aside, can arbitrarily and without due process disenfranchise lakhs of citizens from electing their representatives,” the NGO submitted.
RJD MP Manoj Jha, also a petitioner, claimed reports showed booth officers had skipped household visits, compromising the process’s integrity.
The top court is now expected to hear the matter in full and provide final clarity on the constitutionality of the ongoing electoral roll revision.
Follow us
