Supreme Court Upholds Election Commission's Power To Conduct SIR Of Electoral Rolls, Says It Advances Free & Fair Elections

The Supreme Court today(May 27) upheld the legality of the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of the electoral rolls done by the Election Commission of India and observed that electoral SIR advances the Constitutional imperative of free and fair elections.The Court held that the Election Commission has the power to conduct SIR under Article 324 of the Constitution, read with Representation of the People Act, 1950, and the Rules made thereunder. A bench comprising Chief Justice Surya Kant and Justice Joymalya Bagchi pronounced the judgment in the writ petitions, which challenged the notification issued by the ECI in June last year to conduct SIR in Bihar.The Court held that the SIR process had a nexus with the goal of having free and fair elections. The judgment pronounced by CJI Surya Kant held :"When the statute itself authorises a special revision at any time, for reasons to be recorded and in such manner as the Election Commission may deem fit, the impugned exercise cannot be invalidated merely because it does not conform in every respect to the ordinary modalities contemplated for routine revision. In our considered opinion, the impugned SIR does not supplant the Representation of the People Act and the Rules. Rather, it breathes life into the constitutional mandate under Article 324 within the precise statutory contours provided by Section 21(3). Therefore, it cannot be said that the Commission has acted in excess of its statutory powers."The Court observed that the object sought to be achieved by the SIR bore a direct nexus with the constitutional goal of ensuring free and fair elections, noting that such elections did not rest merely on the mechanics of polling but fundamentally depended on the integrity, accuracy, and credibility of the electoral rolls, which formed the foundation of the democratic process.It further observed that the reasons recorded by the Election Commission, including the passage of more than four decades since the last intensive revision, large-scale additions and deletions over the years, and rapid urbanisation and migration leading to the possibility of duplication and inaccuracies in the electoral rolls, were clearly aimed at preserving that foundational integrity.Procedure did not violate the lawThe Court rejected the argument that the procedure adopted by the ECI was contrary to the Representation of the People Act, 1950 and the Registration of Electors Rules, 1960.The Court also rejected the argument that the procedure negated the presumption of citizenship of persons already on the rolls."Calling upon electors to furnish supporting material in the course of such an exercise does not amount to negation of the presumption. Rather, it reflects the procedural mechanism through which the Commission seeks to reaffirm or, where necessary, correct existing entries. The presumption continues to operate, but it does not negate the possibility of verification," CJI Kant observed.The Court rejected the argument that the procedure violated the judgment in Lal Babu Hussein, on the ground that the judgment only emphasised procedural fairness and did not foreclose verification. In any case, the presumption of citizenship is a rebuttable one, the Court noted.The bench further ruled that deletions carried out under the SIR are not contrary to Rule 21A of the 1960 Rules, stating that the essential safeguards of notice and hearing remain preserved in substance.On the documentation requirements, the Court upheld the Election Commission's framework, holding that the classification of acceptable documents was based on intelligible criteria linked to the objective of maintaining electoral integrity, and was not arbitrary. It noted that Aadhaar had already been included pursuant to an earlier order.The Court held that the SIR satisfies the test of proportionality, observing that the exercise serves the legitimate constitutional objective of ensuring accurate, complete and credible electoral rolls, which are foundational to free and fair elections. It found that the measures adopted were neither excessive nor arbitrary, and that adequate procedural safeguards were built into the process.ECI has power to go into questions of citizenshipThe Court held that the ECI has the power to examine the questions bearing upon citizenship for the purpose of including in the electoral roll. However, the negative determination of the ECI does not result in a conclusive finding that the person is not an Indian citizen. The ECI's exercise is only confined to electoral roll preparation."Upon detailed consideration, we have come to the conclusion that, in view of the statutory requirement under Section 16 of the Representation of the People Act, the Commission, in the course of preparing or revising electoral rolls, is undoubtedly empowered to examine questions bearing upon citizenship. The consequence of such a citizenship determination is correspondingly limited. It affects the individual's entitlement to be...

Supreme Court Upholds Election Commission's Power To Conduct SIR Of Electoral Rolls, Says It Advances Free & Fair Elections

Gursimran Kaur Bakshi

The Court held that the procedure adopted by the ECI in conducting SIR did not violate the law and had nexus with the Constitutional goal of free and fair elections.

This is a premium content
Available exclusively to
Our subscribers

INR 1099+GST

Tags

Gursimran Kaur Bakshi

Supreme Court Upholds Election Commission's Power To Conduct SIR Of Electoral Rolls, Says It Advances Free & Fair Elections

Gursimran Kaur Bakshi

The Court held that the procedure adopted by the ECI in conducting SIR did not violate the law and had nexus with the Constitutional goal of free and fair elections.

This is a premium content Available exclusively to Our subscribers

INR 1099+GST

Tags

Gursimran Kaur Bakshi

This is a premium content
Available exclusively to
Our subscribers