Related Article
- ECI Revises Electoral Roll Revision Schedule for 6 States and UTs; UP Gets 2-Week Extension
- Iran medicine shortages worsened by war
- Ferrari unveils its first all-electric car, the 4-door Luce; can reach 100 km/h in 2.5 seconds
- Elites vs the government: Delhi Gymkhana Club ordered to move, triggering legal battle
- Mass resignations shake Tamil Nadu's opposition party
Supreme Court Upholds EC’s Power to Conduct Special Intensive Revision of Electoral Rolls
The Supreme Court on Wednesday upheld the authority of the Election Commission of India to conduct a Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls, observing that the exercise strengthens the constitutional principle of free and fair elections.
A bench headed by Chief Justice Surya Kant ruled that the poll panel acted within its statutory powers while carrying out the revision process.
“We are unable to conclude that the impugned exercise is a process resorted to solely for administrative convenience. On the contrary, we hold that the electoral SIR advances the constitutional imperative of free and fair elections,” the bench observed in its judgment.
“We are unable to conclude that the impugned exercise is a process resorted to solely for administrative convenience. On the contrary, we hold that the electoral SIR advances the constitutional imperative of free and fair elections,” the bench observed in its judgment.
Several petitions had challenged the SIR exercise, arguing that the Election Commission lacked authority under Article 326 of the Constitution, the Representation of the People Act, 1950, and related rules to undertake such a large-scale revision of electoral rolls.
The top court had reserved its verdict on January 29 after hearing multiple pleas, including one filed by Association for Democratic Reforms (ADR).
Bihar was the first state where the Special Intensive Revision exercise was conducted in its initial phase.
Bihar was the first state where the Special Intensive Revision exercise was conducted in its initial phase.
During the hearings last year, the Supreme Court had observed that the inclusion or deletion of names from electoral rolls falls within the constitutional jurisdiction of the Election Commission.
As part of the exercise, the poll body had identified nearly 65 lakh names that were removed from the draft electoral rolls prepared under the SIR process.
As part of the exercise, the poll body had identified nearly 65 lakh names that were removed from the draft electoral rolls prepared under the SIR process.
Under the SIR notification, voters whose names were absent from the 2002 or 2003 electoral rolls were required to establish ancestral linkage with individuals listed in those rolls.
Defending the revision exercise, the Election Commission argued that Aadhaar cards and voter identity cards alone cannot be treated as conclusive proof of citizenship.
Defending the revision exercise, the Election Commission argued that Aadhaar cards and voter identity cards alone cannot be treated as conclusive proof of citizenship.
However, the petitioners contended that the exercise resembled an “NRC-like process,” alleging that the Election Commission was effectively verifying citizenship — a responsibility they argued lies exclusively with the central government.
