ECI Has Power To Conduct SIR; But Procedure Must Be Voter-Friendly & Reasonable : Supreme Court Says Prima Facie

During the hearing of pleas challenging Bihar Special Intensive Revision (SIR), the Supreme Court on Thursday verbally expressed a prima facie view that the Election Commission of India has powers to conduct a SIR of electoral rolls.

The Court expressed that the powers of the ECI for a Special Intensive Revision are traceable to Section 21(3) of the Representation of the People Act. Hence the Court said that it did not wish to interdict the ECI from the process.

However, the Court added that the manner of its exercise should be 'reasonable' and provide a certain degree of comfort to the citizens and voters.

Justice Joymalya Bagchi told the ECI's counsel Senior Advocate Rakesh Dwivedi during the hearing :

"We are with you that the ECI, through its officers, has ample powers. Even in the course of an intensive revision to invoke Section 22...You (ECI) are merging Section 22 with Section 21(3)...you are exercising a power of intensive survey as a preliminary enquiry into every voter identity...that is, in our understanding, and prima facie, powers are traceable, so we do not wish to interdict...however the manner in which you are doing it has to be reasonable, has to give a certain degree of comfort to the voters and citizens...should not be really straining a voter and citizen to become eligible.”

"Since this action can have some civil consequences of depriving a citizen/person of right to franchise, therefore fair procedure required", added Justice Surya Kant, the presiding judge.

A bench of Justices Kant and Bagchi heard the matter and directed the ECI to publish on websites of Bihar's District Electoral Officers the district-wise list of approximately 65 lakh voters who have been omitted from the draft electoral roll published after SIR. It also stated that the reasons for deletion, such as death, migration, double-registration etc, should be specified and the lists to be published should be EPIC number-searchable.

For the entire post-lunch session, the bench heard ECI's submissions, put forth by Senior Advocate Rakesh Dwivedi, and after getting answers to its queries, suggested that the ECI should make the list of names of the 65 lakh omitted electors' publicly available alongwith reasons for non-inclusion in the draft roll. When that data is physically available, why can it not be uploaded on internet as well to enable wider accessibility, the bench asked.

In this regard, the bench was of the view that a voter/citizen should not have to depend on booth-level agents of recognized political parties (with whom the concerned lists are stated to have been shared) to find out if their names are on the draft electoral roll or not. "We don't want citizens' rights to be dependent on political party workers", said Justice Kant.

At one point, Justice Bagchi told Dwivedi that what was falling from the Court may not be seen as a critique of the poll body for not doing something. "What we are saying is, it's a fact that there is certain departure, as you have agreed, from the statutory rules and SoP itself. Even if we can trace jurisdiction of tailor-making a particular intensive survey to suit a special situation, did [...] come to that degree of transparency which would help to create voter confidence and voter accessibility?" said the judge.

A more detailed report on today's hearing can be read here.

Case Title: ASSOCIATION FOR DEMOCRATIC REFORMS AND ORS. Versus ELECTION COMMISSION OF INDIA, W.P.(C) No. 640/2025 (and connected cases)

Click Here To Read/Download Order