Supreme Court Continues To Probe Bihar SIR As Petitioners Allege ‘Mass Disenfranchisement’; Bench Signals Readiness To Act On Any Major Illegality

sOn Tuesday (12 August), a Supreme Court bench of Justices Surya Kant and Joymalya Bagchi reconvened to hear petitions challenging the Election Commission of India’s (ECI) Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of Bihar’s electoral rolls.

Senior Advocate Kapil Sibal, appearing for RJD MP Manoj Kumar Jha, argued that the removal of around 65 lakh voters from the draft roll published on 1 August without objections to their inclusion was unlawful, Live Law reported.

The bench noted that, under the Rules, excluded individuals must submit applications for re-inclusion, after which objections can be considered.

Sibal contended that much of Bihar’s population lacks the official documents deemed acceptable by the ECI, such as birth certificates or passports, prompting Justice Kant to remark, “Bihar is part of India. If they don't have them, other states won't either.”

Sibal further alleged that the ECI was rejecting Aadhaar, ration cards and EPIC, which most residents possess.

Senior Advocate Rakesh Dwivedi, for the ECI, countered that those listed in the 2003 roll and their children, about 6.5 crore voters, need not submit forms.

He described the petitioners’ concerns as “speculations” and urged that the process be allowed to conclude.

Advocate Prashant Bhushan, for the Association for Democratic Reforms, criticised the non-publication of the names of those deleted, claiming the draft roll had been made non-searchable online after 4 August.

Advocate Vrinda Grover argued that the ECI lacked the legislative authority to restrict acceptable documents, stating such changes required Parliamentary amendment.

Senior Advocate Abhishek Manu Singhvi insisted that voters in the rolls from 2003 to 2025 should be presumed citizens and not subjected to “a citizenship determination exercise” just months before elections.

“You cannot start by presumptively doubting the citizenship of 5 crore of voters,” he said.

Political activist Yogendra Yadav alleged the exercise was designed for “intensive deletion” rather than revision, pointing to a sharp drop in eligible adult voters and disproportionate deletions among women.

Producing two individuals declared dead on the rolls, he was rebuked by ECI counsel for “doing drama before the Court”.

The bench indicated it would intervene if any large-scale illegality was found. The hearing resumes on Wednesday (13 August).

Also Read: Supreme Court Orders Immediate Removal Of Stray Dogs Across Delhi-NCR