Big booster for CEC Gyanesh Kumar ::: Supreme Court upholds EC's power to conduct SIR, says exercise necessary for free and fair polls

 The Supreme Court on Wednesday said that the special intensive revision (SIR) of electoral rolls advances the constitutional imperative of free and fair elections but also held that being struck off the electoral rolls does not mean termination of citizenship.

".... we hold that the electoral SIR advances the constitutional imperative of free and fair elections". 

Deciding on petitions filed against the SIR exercise carried out by the Election Commission in Bihar held in 2025 ahead of the Assembly polls there, a bench comprising Chief Justice of India Surya Kant and Justice Joymalya Bagchi ruled it cannot be said that the poll panel acted outside statutory powers in carrying out the exercise.

“The competent authority shall take necessary steps in accordance with law and conclude the process before the next Vidhan Sabha or local body elections, whichever is earlier, after giving notice and affording an opportunity of hearing to the concerned individuals. 

In the event the competent authority holds that such deleted individuals are citizens, their names shall be restored to the electoral rolls.”

The bench held that the commission has the power to conduct the SIR under Article 324 of the Constitution, along with the Representation of People Act, 1950 and the rules framed under the Act.

“We are unable to conclude that the impugned exercise is a process resorted solely for administrative convenience. On the contrary, we hold that the electoral SIR advances the constitutional imperative of free and fair elections,” the bench said, as reported by legal news websites in their live coverage of the verdict.

Arguing that the SIR was a “National Registry of Citizens (NRC) like process”, The petitioners including the Association for Democratic Reforms (ADR) had challenged the SIR claiming that the commission did not have the powers to conduct the exercise as the right to verify citizenship was vested with the government.

In the judgment, CJI Kant said: “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.”

The CJI said: “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). There it cannot be said that the commission has acted in excess of its statutory powers.”

The SIR notification, which was first issued in Bihar, had stated that the voters who were not included in the electoral rolls for the year 2002 or 2003 had to show linkage with parents if present in the rolls. After the completion of the SIR exercise names of around 63 lakh voters were excluded from the draft rolls.

The Election Commission had argued before the top court that Aadhaar and voters identity cards issued by the Election Commission cannot be treated as conclusive evidence of citizenship.

“We accordingly issue a further direction regarding persons whose names have been deleted from the 2003 electoral rolls on the ground that the Commission formed the opinion that they are not citizens. 

The Commission is directed to refer such cases within four weeks to the competent authority under the Citizenship Act, 1955 for determination of their citizenship claims,” the bench said.