SC: Electoral Rolls Cannot Be Static

New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Wednesday said that electoral rolls cannot “remain static” and must be revised by the Election Commission, asking, “Otherwise, how will the poll panel delete the names of those who are dead, migrated, or shifted to other constituencies?”

The apex court also disagreed with the contention that the special intensive revision (SIR) of the voter list in poll-bound Bihar had no basis in law and ought to be quashed.

A two-judge bench of Justices Surya Kant and Joymalya Bagchi, hearing the matter, was informed by the NGO Association of Democratic Reforms (ADR) that the exercise should not be permitted to be carried out across India.

Besides the NGO, leaders of Opposition parties, including the Rashtriya Janata Dal (RJD) and the Congress, have challenged the Election Commission of India’s (ECI) electoral roll revision drive in Bihar.

Senior advocate Gopal Sankaranarayanan, appearing for ADR, argued that the ECI notification on SIR should be set aside as it lacked legal basis and had never been contemplated in law. He said the ECI had never conducted such an exercise since its inception, and if it were allowed now, “only God knows where it will end.”

The apex court observed, “By that logic, special intensive revision can never be done. To our mind, the electoral roll can never be static. There is bound to be revision; otherwise, how will the poll panel delete the names of those who are dead, migrated, or shifted to other constituencies?”

The bench further told the NGO’s counsel that the ECI had residual powers to conduct such an exercise as it deemed fit.

Responding to Sankaranarayanan’s submission that the law only allowed revision of the electoral roll for “any constituency” or “for part of a constituency” and that the ECI could not wipe out the rolls of an entire state for fresh inclusion, Justice Bagchi remarked, “Actually, it is a battle between a constitutional right and a constitutional power.”

Advocate Prashant Bhushan, also appearing for ADR, alleged that the ECI had “played mischief” by removing the search feature from the draft roll and the list of 65 lakh people whose names were deleted as dead, migrated, or shifted to other constituencies. “This happened just a day after Congress leader Rahul Gandhi held a press conference pointing out over a lakh fake voters,” he said.

Justice Kant said he was unaware of any such press conference but noted that under Section 10 of the Registration of Electors Rules, 1960, the ECI is mandated to publish a copy of the draft roll at the office in the constituency.

“They have to publish the draft roll at the office in the constituency. That’s a minimum threshold under the law. However, we would have liked it if it was published on the website for wider publicity,” Justice Bagchi added.

Senior advocate Rakesh Dwivedi, appearing for the ECI, said that the petitioners had earlier argued that Bihar’s rural population was not tech-savvy, yet were now complaining about the inability of the same people to search online.

During the hearing, the bench also told senior advocate Abhishek Singhvi, appearing for the petitioners: “The number of documents in the summary revision conducted earlier in the state was seven, and in SIR it is 11, which shows it is voter-friendly. We understand your argument that non-acceptance of Aadhaar is exclusionary, but a higher number of documents is actually inclusionary.”

The hearing will continue on Thursday.