Plea that SIR of Electoral Rolls Wasn't Held Earlier Not a Ground to Challenge: SC

PTI, NEW DELHI, NOV 26, 2025: The Supreme Court on Wednesday stated that the argument that the special intensive revision (SIR) of electoral rolls was never conducted before in the country cannot be used to examine the validity of the Election Commission's decisions to carry out this exercise in several states.

Commencing the final hearing on a series of petitions challenging the validity of the Election Commission's decisions to revise electoral rolls in various states, a bench comprising Chief Justice Surya Kant and Justice Joymalya Bagchi said the poll panel has the "inherent power to determine the correctness of entries in Form 6."

Form 6 is used by individuals to register themselves as voters. The bench reiterated that the Aadhaar card does not "confer absolute proof of citizenship" and that is why the court had stated it would be one of the documents among a list of approved documents. "If anyone is deleted, they will have to be given a notice of deletion," the Chief Justice noted.

“Aadhaar is a creation of statute for availing benefits. Just because a person was granted Aadhaar for ration, should he be made a voter also? Suppose someone belongs to a neighbouring country and works as a labourer,” the CJI added.

The bench seemed to disagree with a particular submission from senior advocate Kapil Sibal, who appeared for some of the petitioners. Sibal had argued that the Election Commission was akin to a "post office" that must accept the Form 6 submitted and include the voter’s name. "Prima facie, yes... unless there is some contrary material," Sibal said.

However, the bench responded, stating that the Election Commission "will always have this inherent constitutional jurisdiction to determine the correctness of the documents."

The top court also fixed the schedule for hearing several pleas specifically challenging SIR in Tamil Nadu, Kerala, and West Bengal.

The bench directed the Election Commission to file its response to the petitions challenging SIR in Tamil Nadu by December 1 and granted two days for the petitioners to file their rejoinders. The petitions will be listed for hearing on December 4.

In the case of West Bengal, where a few Booth Level Officers (BLOs) have allegedly committed suicide, the bench decided to take up the matter for hearing on December 9. In the meantime, the Election Commission has been directed to file its response by the weekend.

The bench also allowed the West Bengal State Election Commission and the state government to file their replies by December 1.

The Chief Justice-led bench began the final hearing on the larger issue of the legality and validity of the Election Commission's decision to carry out the revision of electoral rolls.

Sibal initiated his arguments by asserting that the SIR exercise raised fundamental concerns about democratic participation. "This is a matter which affects democracy," he said. He argued that the SIR places an unconstitutional burden on ordinary voters, many of whom are illiterate, to fill out forms and risk exclusion if they fail to do so.

"Filling up the forms is not the responsibility of the elector. So many are illiterate and do not know how to read and write. If they cannot fill the forms, they will be ousted (from the electoral rolls)," Sibal said, urging the court to focus on constitutional safeguards rather than procedural justifications.

Sibal further argued that Aadhaar establishes residence, and while it is not conclusive proof of citizenship, it triggers a presumption that cannot be dismissed easily. "There is a presumption in my favour. I have an Aadhaar. That is my residence. You want to take it away... take it away by a process and let the process be proven before this court," Sibal said. He also warned that the SIR cannot be completed meaningfully within the short timelines prescribed.

Justice Bagchi observed that Form 6, used for voter inclusion, cannot bind the Election Commission to accept entries without verification. He emphasised the need to weed out deceased voters, noting that voter lists were publicly displayed in panchayats and on official websites. "We do not judge in a vacuum," he said.

The hearing will continue on Thursday.