The Supreme Court on Thursday asked the Election Commission of India, in the interest of justice, to consider Aadhaar Card, Elector’s Photo Identity Card (EPIC) and ration cards as proof for voter registration in the ongoing Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral roll in poll-bound Bihar.
“The Election Commission of India (ECI) has pointed out that the documents’ list for verification of voters is 11, but the list is not exhaustive. Therefore, in our prima facie view, since the list is not exhaustive, it would be in the interest of justice for ECI to consider Aadhaar, EPIC, issued by the ECI itself, and ration card,” the court recorded in a short order.
A Bench of Justices Sudhanshu Dhulia and Joymalya Bagchi allowed the SIR in Bihar to “go on”. It did not pass any interim order of stay. The petitioners also did not press for a freeze of the SIR exercise as the court listed the case for the hearing next on July 28, prior to the publication of the draft electoral roll in August.
The court said its judicial review of SIR would focus on the ECI’s power to undertake this exercise, in the manner in which it was done and the chosen timing of the process, which “is very short”. It indicated that the nature of the Bihar revision seemed nebulous, neither ‘summary’ nor ‘special’ as categorised under Section 21 of the Representation of People Act, 1950.
“This issue is very important. It goes to the very roots of our democracy. It is about the right to vote,” observed Justice Dhulia.
‘SIR about identity’
The ECI objected to Aadhaar, saying it was only a document to authenticate identity and not citizenship. Aadhaar was also issued to non-citizens who were ordinarily resident in a place.
“The Aadhaar Act clearly says it is not proof of citizenship. The ECI cannot exalt the status of the Aadhaar,” senior advocate Rakesh Dwivedi, for ECI, countered.
However, Justice Dhulia said Aadhaar was one of the primary documents of identity, and the SIR was in fact about proving the identity of a person who wanted to exercise her right to vote.
“If I want a caste certificate, I show my Aadhaar. A document like Aadhaar, considered basic for getting other documents, is not part of the 11 documents? Caste certificate is one of the documents among the 11, but not Aadhaar? The entire exercise of SIR is about identity only. You want to know whether this person is A or B,” Justice Dhulia addressed Dwivedi.
Justice Bagchi agreed that none of the 11 documents the ECI had listed in the June 24 notification was a telltale one for citizenship.
“They are all meant to prove your identity. Yet, you (ECI) stridently oppose the inclusion of Aadhaar… You can do your work, but do it in accordance with the mandate of law. The statute, Representation of People Act, allows Aadhaar,” Justice Bagchi addressed the EC, represented by senior advocates KK Venugopal and Dwivedi.
Dwivedi repeatedly urged the court to observe in its order that it would be left to the “discretion” of the ECI to accept Aadhaar, voter ID or ration cards. However, Justice Dhulia said the order was amply clear. “It is for ECI to consider accepting these three documents,” Justice Dhulia said.
‘Not under ECI’s purview’
The ECI counsel said the SIR in Bihar was necessary as the last intensive look at the voters’ list in the State was done in 2003. He said already 60 per cent, or 5.5 crore enumerations, were already filled up and half of this uploaded on ECI Net.
“For the first time in history, we have created ECI Net where the documents would be uploaded. This drive need not be repeated, except for adding names,” Dwivedi informed the court.
The petitioners, represented by senior advocates Kapil Sibal, AM Singhvi, Gopal Sankaranarayanan, Shadan Farasat and Vrinda Grover, said the SIR was “citizenship screening”, especially of vulnerable groups, in the guise of voter registration. They argued that the ECI did not have any jurisdiction to ascertain citizenship, that job was that of the Ministry of Home Affairs.
“A small, low-level officer of the ECI, like the BLO, ascertains citizenship. It is the Government of India who decides citizenship,” said Sibal.
He cited the Bihar government’s own survey to show that 87 per cent of the population had Aadhaar, while only 14 per cent had matriculation certificates and 2 per cent possessed passports. “This means a substantial portion of the population risk disenfranchisement despite having an Aadhaar. The burden has suddenly fallen on the citizen to prove she is indeed a citizen,” he submitted.
Space for appeal
Justice Bagchi questioned the tight deadlines for SIR. “You say within 30 days citizens have to do this and another 30 days they have to do that… The timing is very short… Why is SIR so election-focussed?” the judge queried. He asked whether there was any opportunity or mechanism for people omitted from the electoral roll to be heard or to appeal.
Senior advocate AM Singhvi said the ECI cannot exercise its powers under Section 21(3) of the 1950 Act to conduct a special revision of the electoral roll or to ‘superintend, control or direct’ elections under Article 324 of the Constitution without “reason or basis”. The SIR was a violation of the provisions of the Registration of Electors Rules, 1960, he submitted.
“These powers cannot surely be used to sweep away the level playing field before an election by disenfranchising crores of electors in Bihar who have voted in at least five elections since January 2003… An administrative order on June 24 by the ECI has en masse put voters in Bihar in a state of suspended animation or ‘trishanku’ state. This is a fudge,” said Singhvi.
He referred to the Supreme Court judgment in Lal Babu Hussein versus Electoral Registration Officer case, which had held that a person already listed in the electoral roll cannot be compelled a second time to show evidence to prove he is a citizen.
Sankaranarayanan asked why the SIR, meant to done across the country, began with Bihar, which is scheduled for Assembly elections in November.
Published on July 10, 2025