Supreme Court Questions Timing of Bihar Electoral Roll Revision Ahead of Assembly Polls

The petitioners have argued the special intensive revision of the Bihar voter list is "arbitrary" and "discriminative" since it forces voters on the list for over a decade to re-verify themselves.
Supreme Court Questions Timing of Bihar Electoral Roll Revision Ahead of Assembly Polls
Supreme Court Questions Timing of Bihar Electoral Roll Revision Ahead of Assembly Polls
Published on
Updated on
3 min read

New Delhi: The timing of the Election Commission's 'special intensive revision' of Bihar's electoral rolls - months before the Assembly election - was questioned by the Supreme Court Thursday, in a high-stakes hearing that included arguments on disenfranchisement and determinants of citizenship.

"Your exercise is not the problem... it is the timing," Justice Sudhanshu Dhulia told the Election Commission, noting individuals dropped from the list would have no time to appeal the exclusion.

"There is nothing wrong in the exercise... except that a person will be disenfranchised ahead of the election and s/he won't have the time to defend the exclusion before voting," Justice Dhulia continued.

"Courts will not touch the electoral roll once they are finalised... which means a disenfranchised person will lack the option to challenge it (the revised list) before the election," he said.

"There is nothing wrong in having this intensive process so non-citizen do not remain on rolls... but it should be de hors (i.e., conducted separately from) this election," Justice Joymala Bagchi added.

Top Court's 3 Questions To EC

"This is a very important issue and goes to the very root of democracy... they (the petitioners) are not only challenging the powers of the Election Commission but also the procedure..." the Supreme Court then said as it sought a reply from the poll panel on questions raised by the clutch of petitioners.

The court eventually posed three important questions to the Election Commission.

  1. Explain the panel's authority to conduct a 'special intensive revision',

  2. Explain the validity of the review procedure, and

  3. Explain the timing of the exercise, i.e., just before an election.

The Supreme Court - which refused an interim stay on the voter list revision before today's hearing - asked tough questions of the poll panel. This included asking the EC to explain which section of the law - the Representation of Peoples Act - allowed it to conduct this exercise. "There is either 'summary revision' or 'intensive revision'. Where is 'special intensive revision'?" the poll panel was asked.

The EC was also asked why it had 'linked' this exercise to the 2025 Bihar election.

'Why Aadhaar Not Accepted'?

Earlier one of the petitioners, senior advocate Gopal Sankaranarayan, argued the revision is "arbitrary" and "discriminative" since it forces voters on the list for over a decade to re-verify themselves, and to do so without using government-issued IDs like the Aadhaar.

On this point too the court had questions for the poll panel, asking why an ID, insisted on by the government as proof of identity for the issue of other documents, had been excluded.

Senior advocate Sankaranarayan set the ball rolling this morning by pointing out there have been 10 major elections (i.e., five federal and five state) had been held since the last revision.

"They say last revision was in 2003 when it (Bihar's population) was four crore people. Now it is about 7.9 crore and about 10 elections have happened since. And now, with polls months away, they are carrying out this exercise... in which the draft has to be out in 30 days?"

"Shockingly they say they will not accept Aadhaar... despite amendments to the act that allow Aadhaar for verification, they say now it will not be considered," Sankaranarayan said.

The choice of these documents, apart from the revision itself, is illogical, he argued, pointing out that exemptions had been made for certain sections, including members of the judiciary.

"They will accept only 11 documents...they said they won't even consider their own voter ID card and they are even asking documents to verify one's parents," he continued, raising points also highlighted by opposition politicians who have criticised the timing of the list revision.

The court was initially lukewarm to challenges, pointing out the revision was being carried out according to the law and the selection of 2003 as a cut-off date was tied to the last time a revision was conducted.

"The EC's action has a logic to it. What is wrong with it?" Justice Dhulia asked, "What they are doing is mandated under the Constitution. You cannot say they are doing something not mandated..."

Political Row Over 'Special Revision'

The Congress and the Rashtriya Janata Dal - key members of the opposition Mahagathbandhan bloc - have been vocal in their critique of the voter list revision, arguing it seeks to exclude a chunk of voters and potentially tilt the balance of voteshare towards the ruling alliance.

That point was mentioned today by senior advocate Vrinda Grover, who said, "This is not an ordinary exercise... it is designed to exclude the poor, the migrant labourer, and vulnerable sections of society.

Source: NDTV

Stay connected to Jaano Junction on Instagram, Facebook, YouTube, Twitter and Koo. Listen to our Podcast on Spotify or Apple Podcasts.

logo
Jaano Junction
www.jaanojunction.com