Supreme Court Upholds Interim Order Allowing Aadhaar as Valid ID in Bihar Voter List Revision

Keeps October 7 as Date for Final Hearing; Stresses Any Illegality Could Invalidate Entire Exercise

Agencies | Delhi | September 16, 2025:  The Supreme Court on Monday declined to modify its interim order dated September 8, which directed the Election Commission of India (ECI) to accept the Aadhaar card as the twelfth officially recognised document for identity verification in the ongoing Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls in Bihar. This interim ruling, while not final, has prompted strong reactions and legal challenges, with broader implications for electoral processes nationwide.

A bench comprising Justice Surya Kant and Justice Joymalya Bagchi reiterated that the inclusion of Aadhaar is a provisional measure and does not reflect a conclusive stance on its validity as an identity document for voter registration. The Court asserted that Aadhaar could not be arbitrarily excluded when other commonly accepted documents—such as ration cards and driving licences—are equally vulnerable to forgery.

“Driving licences can be forged, ration cards can be forged. Several documents can be forged. Aadhaar is to be utilised to the extent law permits,” the bench observed during proceedings.

The Court was hearing a plea filed by advocate Ashwini Upadhyay, who sought a modification of the earlier order on grounds that Aadhaar is neither proof of citizenship nor residence. He argued that individuals can obtain Aadhaar simply by residing in India for 182 days, raising concerns that its acceptance could open the electoral rolls to non-citizens. Upadhyay claimed the presence of "lakhs of Rohingyas and Bangladeshis in Bihar" and warned that the use of Aadhaar in this context could be "disastrous."

In response, the bench firmly stated that the potential consequences—whether beneficial or harmful—would be for the ECI to assess. Nonetheless, the Court issued a notice to the Election Commission regarding Upadhyay's concerns, indicating that the issue merits further scrutiny.

Significantly, the Court made it clear that the constitutional authority of the Election Commission implies a presumption of lawful conduct. However, it also issued a strong cautionary note: if any illegality is discovered during the SIR process, the entire exercise could be declared void.

“What difference will it make to us if the final electoral roll is published?” Justice Kant remarked, addressing concerns about timing. “If we are satisfied there is some illegality, we can set it aside.”

The final hearing on the matter has been scheduled for October 7, 2025, when the Supreme Court will take up arguments on the legality of the Bihar SIR. The bench also made it clear that the eventual verdict would carry implications beyond Bihar, applying to any similar SIR exercises conducted across India.

“The judgment in the Bihar SIR will be applicable for pan-India SIR,” the Court stated, clarifying that it cannot prohibit the Election Commission from undertaking similar voter roll revisions in other states.

Earlier, the Supreme Court had declined to intervene in the ECI’s timeline for the SIR process in Bihar. Despite appeals to extend the deadline for claims, objections, and corrections—which ended on September 1—the Court refrained from doing so after the ECI gave an assurance that even late submissions would be considered before the final list is published on September 30.

Meanwhile, a series of petitions have been filed challenging the constitutional validity and potential impact of the SIR initiative in Bihar. The petitioners include prominent figures and organisations such as RJD MP Manoj Jha, the Association for Democratic Reforms (ADR), People’s Union for Civil Liberties (PUCL), civil rights activist Yogendra Yadav, Trinamool MP Mahua Moitra, and former Bihar MLA Mujahid Alam.

These petitions contest the Election Commission’s June 24 directive, which requires substantial sections of voters in Bihar to submit documentation proving Indian citizenship to remain on the electoral rolls. The petitioners argue that this directive risks large-scale disenfranchisement, especially among the rural poor and other marginalised communities. They contend that excluding commonly held documents such as Aadhaar and ration cards from being considered sufficient proof of identity would disproportionately affect vulnerable groups.

While the Supreme Court has yet to deliver a final verdict, Monday's proceedings underscore the delicate balance between safeguarding electoral integrity and ensuring universal suffrage. The coming hearing on October 7 is expected to play a pivotal role in shaping the legal contours of voter verification and identity documentation protocols not only in Bihar but across India.