The Supreme Court on Wednesday upheld the Election Commission of India’s authority to conduct a Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls, observing that the exercise promotes the constitutional objective of ensuring free and fair elections.
A bench headed by Chief Justice Surya Kant ruled that the poll panel acted within its statutory powers while undertaking the electoral roll revision process and rejected claims that the exercise exceeded its legal mandate.
“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 said.
The verdict came on a batch of petitions challenging the legality of the SIR exercise, including one filed by the Association for Democratic Reforms (ADR). The petitioners had argued that the Election Commission lacked the 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 Supreme Court had reserved its judgment on January 29 after hearing extensive arguments from all parties.
The first phase of the SIR exercise was conducted in Bihar, where the Election Commission later reported that around 65 lakh names were removed from the draft electoral rolls following the revision process.
Under the SIR guidelines, voters whose names did not appear in the 2002 or 2003 electoral rolls were required to establish ancestral linkage with individuals listed in those rolls.
Defending the exercise, the Election Commission maintained that documents such as Aadhaar cards and voter identity cards cannot be treated as conclusive proof of citizenship.
The petitioners, however, contended that the revision resembled a National Register of Citizens (NRC)-type exercise and alleged that the poll body was effectively verifying citizenship, a function they argued rests exclusively with the central government.
The apex court, however, upheld the Election Commission’s powers and reaffirmed that the inclusion and exclusion of names in electoral rolls fall within its constitutional and statutory domain.
