SC Flags Concerns Over Bihar Voter Roll Purge, Hearing to Continue

The Supreme Court on Tuesday heard marathon arguments in challenges to the Election Commission's Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of Bihar's electoral rolls, with petitioners alleging illegal exclusion of 65 lakh voters.

A Bench of Justices Surya Kant and Joymalya Bagchi presided over the post-lunch hearing. Senior Advocate Kapil Sibal, appearing for RJD MP Manoj Kumar Jha, said nearly 65 lakh names had been dropped from the draft roll published on August 1 "without any objection to their inclusion," calling the move unlawful. The Bench noted that under the Rules, excluded persons must apply for inclusion before objections can be entertained, according to a report in Bar and Bench.

Sibal argued that "Bihar people don't have these documents, that's the point," referring to ECI's list of acceptable proofs such as birth certificates and passports. Justice Kant retorted, "Bihar is part of India. If they don't have them, other states won't either." Raising eyebrows at Sibal's claim, Justice Kant remarked, "There must be something to prove you are a citizen of India... you need it even to buy a SIM."

On Justice Bagchi's query whether the 65 lakh figure was based on the 2003 rolls, Sibal said it was with reference to 2025 rolls. ECI counsel Rakesh Dwivedi countered that voters in the 2003 roll and their children - about 6.5 crore - need not file forms, terming petitioners' claims "speculations" and urging the Court to let the process run.

Sibal cited ECI data: 7.9 crore total voters, 7.24 crore form submissions, 22 lakh dead, 36 lakh shifted - figures allegedly given "without making any enquiries." Justice Bagchi observed that intensive revision aims to weed out dead or migrated names.

Advocate Prashant Bhushan, for ADR, said ECI had neither published the names of 65 lakh deleted voters nor reasons for deletion. He accused the Commission of making the draft roll "non-searchable" after August 4, forcing citizens to "ask the Booth Level Agent of the political party" instead of accessing the list directly.

Advocate Vrinda Grover argued that ECI's specification of acceptable documents was "ultra vires," lacking Parliamentary backing. Senior Advocate Abhishek Manu Singhvi warned against "presumptively doubting the citizenship of 5 crore voters," stressing that removal on citizenship grounds requires due process.

Justice Kant assured that the court will interfere If 5 crore voters are declared invalid. Singhvi maintained that under Lal Babu Hussein v. ERO (1995), citizenship determination is outside ECI's domain.

Political activist Yogendra Yadav called the SIR "an exercise of intensive deletion," noting no new names were added. He flagged disproportionate deletions among women voters and produced two individuals allegedly deleted as "dead." Justice Kant said inadvertent errors could be remedied through the process itself.

The hearing will resume tomorrow.