Supreme Court refuses to stay Bihar voter verification, SIR will continue…..

In Short

Supreme Court of India -File Photo-ANI

*A hearing was held in the Supreme Court on Thursday July 10, 2025 in protest against the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of the voter list before the Bihar Assembly elections. During this, after hearing the arguments of the petitioners and the Election Commission, the court refused to ban SIR.

*The problem is not with the process, the problem is with the time chosen’, ‘Supreme’ comment on Bihar voter list revision

*The petitions challenging the special revision of the voter list in Bihar are being heard in the Supreme Court. The petitioners’ lawyer has called the revision wrong. While the Election Commission has objected to the petitions. The Supreme Court asked questions to the Election Commission on keeping the Aadhar card out of the list of documents in the revision.

*Earlier, the Supreme Court told the Commission that the list of documents is not final. The court asked the Commission to include Aadhaar, Voter Card and Ration Card as proof, which the Commission opposed.

*The Supreme Court said that we are not stopping you. We are asking you to act under the law. The court will now hear the matter on July 28.

*Senior advocate Kapil Sibal, who is appearing for the petitioners, said that the Booth Level Officer (BLO) has been given the power to decide whether someone is a citizen of India or not. The central government will decide whether a person is a citizen of India or not. The Election Commission cannot decide this.

New Delhi : The Supreme Court is hearing the petitions filed against the special revision of the voter list campaign in Bihar. On keeping the Aadhaar card out of the documents required for voter verification, the Election Commission said that Aadhaar card is not a proof of citizenship. On this, the Supreme Court asked the Election Commission that why are you raising the issue of citizenship in the special revision of the voter list? This is the jurisdiction of the Home Ministry. If you had to check citizenship through revision, then you should have done it earlier. It is too late now. The Supreme Court said that the problem is not with the revision process. Rather the problem is with the time chosen for this.

Supreme Court’s comment on Election Commission

A bench of Justice Sudhanshu Dhulia and Justice Joymala Bagchi is hearing the petitions. Justice Bagchi said that there is nothing wrong in this intensive process so that non-citizens are not in the voter list, but it should happen before this election. Justice Dhulia said that once the voter list is finalized and notified and after that elections are held, no court will interfere in it.

Why are you linking the revision to Bihar elections: Supreme Court

Justice Joymalya Bagchi told the Election Commission’s lawyer that why are you linking this process to the election to be held in November? This is a process that can be independent of the elections of the whole country. On this, the Election Commission’s lawyer said that the process will be followed. He assured that no one will be excluded from the voter list without giving an opportunity to be heard.

Supreme Court seeks response on three issues
The Supreme Court has sought response from the Election Commission on three issues. The Supreme Court told the Election Commission’s lawyer that there is no doubt that the issue before the court is related to the root of democracy and the right to vote. The petitioners are not only challenging the Election Commission’s right to conduct the elections, but are also challenging its process and timing. These three issues need to be answered.

‘Election Commission cannot exist without voters’
The Election Commission’s lawyer told the Supreme Court that the Election Commission is a constitutional body which has a direct connection with the voters and if there are no voters, we will not exist. The Commission neither intends nor can exclude anyone from the voter list, unless the Commission is compelled to do so by the provisions of the law. We cannot discriminate on the basis of religion, caste etc.

‘It is too late, you should have done this earlier’

Earlier, Justice Dhulia told the Election Commission’s lawyer that the evidence in the process for citizenship should be strictly evaluated. There should be quasi-judicial authority for this. If you have to check citizenship under the SIR of the voter list in Bihar, then you should have taken action earlier. Now it is too late. The Election Commission told the Supreme Court that citizenship verification is necessary to be a voter in India under Article 326 of the Constitution.

Don’t go to the streets, stay on the highway: Justice Dhulia

Petitioner’s lawyer Gopal S said that the final voter list in Bihar came into existence only in June. After this, Justice Dhulia said that the Election Commission is including judges, journalists and artists in it because they are already known. We should not drag it too long. We should not go to the streets, but should stay on the highway. Justice Bagchi said that your main argument is to keep Aadhaar card out of the category of documents.

Told the petitioner’s lawyer – you tell the Election Commission when should it do this work
The Supreme Court said that the work of voter list revision is in the Commission’s intensive revision and summary revision rules. The Supreme Court told the petitioner’s lawyer that tell us when is the Commission expected to do this? From time to time or when? You are not challenging the powers of the Election Commission, but the way it operates.

What the Election Commission is doing is mandatory under the Constitution’

During the hearing, petitioner’s counsel Gopal S said that this is a revision of the voter list. The only relevant provision is the Representation of the People Act 1950. Regular revision of the voter list can be done under the Act and the rules. One is an intensive revision and the other is a summary revision. In intensive revision, the entire voter list is erased and the entire process is afresh, which all 7.9 crore voters have to go through. In short, minor amendments are made in the voter list. What has happened here is to order a special intensive revision.

On this, Justice Sudhanshu Dhulia said that what the Election Commission is doing is mandatory under the Constitution. You cannot say that they are doing something which is not mandatory under the Constitution. They did this last time in 2003. Because intensive exercise has been done. They have data for it. Why will they rack their brains again? The Election Commission has a logic behind it.

Several petitions filed
Several new petitions, including a joint petition by leaders of opposition parties Congress, NCP (Sharad Pawar), Shiv Sena (Uddhav Thackeray), Samajwadi Party, JMM, CPI and CPI (ML), were filed in the apex court against the Election Commission’s decision to conduct SIR before the elections in Bihar. Apart from separate petitions by RJD MP Manoj Jha and Trinamool Congress MP Mahua Moitra, Congress’ KC Venugopal, Sharad Pawar’s Supriya Sule from the NCP faction, D Raja from the Communist Party of India, Harinder Singh Malik from the Samajwadi Party, Arvind Sawant from Shiv Sena (Uddhav Thackeray), Sarfaraz Ahmed from Jharkhand Mukti Morcha and Dipankar Bhattacharya of CPI (ML) have jointly moved the Supreme Court.