National

SIR Quandary : Additions and deletions are part of the electoral roll revision exercise undertaken by the Election Commission – Supreme Court

When senior advocate Kapil Sibal, appearing for one of the petitioners, alleged mass deletions of names from the voter list, the CJI said, “Additions and deletions are part of the electoral roll revision exercise.”

Posted on

File Picture : ANI/X

Additions and deletions are part of the electoral roll revision exercise undertaken by the Election Commission, the Supreme Court said , as it resumed final hearing on a batch of 19 petitions challenging the Special Intensive Revision of electoral rolls in Bihar.

On the admissibility of Aadhaar card as one of the proofs, the top court categorically said that the possibility of forgery cannot be a ground to reject the 12-digit biometric identifier.

Observing that even passports are processed through private agencies performing public duties, a bench comprising Chief Justice Surya Kant and Justice Joymalya Bagchi said, “If a document is recognised by statute, it cannot be discarded merely because a private entity is involved in its issuance.”

When senior advocate Kapil Sibal, appearing for one of the petitioners, alleged mass deletions of names from the voter list, the CJI said, “Additions and deletions are part of the electoral roll revision exercise.”
In their rejoinder submissions, the petitioners questioned the transparency, timing and legal basis of the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) exercise.

The bench heard rejoinder submissions from senior advocates Kapil Sibal, Gopal Sankaranarayanan, Prashant Bhushan, Vijay Hansaria and petitioner-in-person, Yogendra Yadav.

The court had commenced final arguments in the matter on August 12 last year, when it observed that inclusion or exclusion of names in electoral rolls falls within the constitutional remit of the Election Commission of India (ECI).

Election Commission’s defence
The ECI has defended the SIR exercise, maintaining that Aadhaar and voter identity cards cannot be treated as conclusive proof of citizenship.

Senior advocate Vijay Hansaria, arguing in favour of the exercise, submitted that Aadhaar cannot be relied upon for determining citizenship, noting that under the Aadhaar Act, even foreign nationals residing in India for 182 days are eligible for enrolment and that the statute expressly clarifies that Aadhaar does not confer citizenship or domicile.

Most Popular

Exit mobile version