New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Thursday heard petitions challenging the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls. The court firmly stated that the process must remain fully transparent. It also clarified that the Election Commission of India (ECI) cannot act arbitrarily while revising voter lists.
The bench raised a key question during the hearing. It asked whether the SIR exercise could take place outside the framework of existing election rules. The observation highlights the court’s concern over procedural fairness and voter rights.
Court Emphasises Fairness and Accountability on SIR
The Supreme Court acknowledged that voter list verification plays an important role in elections. However, it stressed that the process must follow legal procedures at every step. The judges warned that any lack of transparency could erode public trust in the electoral system.
The bench also noted that actions taken by the Election Commission should not appear arbitrary. According to the court, electoral authorities must ensure that genuine voters do not face exclusion during the revision process.
Election Commission Defends SIR Process
Senior advocate Rakesh Dwivedi, appearing for the Election Commission, defended the SIR exercise. He told the court that voter list verification remains fair, reasonable, and necessary for democracy. He urged the bench to dismiss the petitions filed against the process.
Dwivedi said the Constitution assigns the Election Commission the responsibility of maintaining accurate electoral rolls. He argued that regular verification prevents duplicate entries, bogus voters, and illegal voting.
Bihar Example Cited in Court
Referring to Bihar, Dwivedi informed the court that authorities removed around 66 lakh names during the SIR exercise. He pointed out that no affected voter has approached the Supreme Court with a complaint so far.
He added that the court should not examine every case based on demands from NGOs or political leaders. According to him, such an approach could disrupt administrative efficiency.
Dwivedi also made a sharp remark during the hearing. He said that criticising or abusing the Election Commission has become a political fashion in recent times. He argued that some parties attack the institution to gain electoral advantage.
Why the Case Matters
The petitions challenging SIR raise serious concerns. Petitioners fear that large-scale deletions may exclude eligible voters. They also question whether sufficient safeguards exist to protect voting rights.
The Supreme Court’s observations suggest a careful balancing act. The court appears willing to allow voter list revisions. At the same time, it insists on transparency, fairness, and strict adherence to law.
What Lies Ahead
The case carries long-term implications for future elections. A ruling could redefine how electoral roll revisions take place across India. It may also clarify the limits of the Election Commission’s powers.
As the hearing continues, all eyes remain on the Supreme Court. Its final decision will shape the future of voter list management and democratic accountability in the country.
Read here: Silver Prices Hit ₹3 Lakh per Kg on MCX