SC Upholds ECI’s Power to Conduct Special Intensive Revision of Electoral Rolls, Rules It Advances Free and Fair Elections Without Determining Citizenship.

Read Judgment:

Supreme Court Judgment Upholding Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of Electoral Rolls  

Date of Judgment: May 27, 2026  

1. Background  
- Challenge: Writ petitions filed against ECI notification dated June 2024 directing Special Intensive Revision (SIR) in Bihar.  
- Petitioners: Association of Democratic Reforms, Yogendra Yadav, MPs Mahua Moitra, Manoj Jha, KC Venugopal, Supriya Sule, and others.  
- Status of SIR: Completed in Bihar, Kerala, Tamil Nadu, Puducherry, and West Bengal. Ongoing in Uttar Pradesh, Gujarat, Rajasthan, and other states. Judgment reserved on January 29, 2026.

2. Key Issues Before the Court  
1. Whether ECI has power to conduct SIR under Article 324 and Section 21(3), Representation of the People Act, 1950.  
2. Whether SIR procedure violates the RP Act, 1950, Registration of Electors Rules, 1960, or the decision in Lal Babu Hussein.  
3. Whether ECI can examine citizenship for preparation of electoral rolls.

3. Arguments of Parties  
- Petitioners: SIR is backdoor NRC-like citizenship verification. Shifts burden to voters, creates "suspended citizenship". No statutory backing for enumeration forms. Section 21(3) permits only constituency-specific revision, not mass exercise. Violates Lal Babu Hussein.  
- ECI: SIR is electoral purification, not citizenship adjudication. Constitutional duty to ensure citizen-based franchise. Soft-touch verification by election officials with safeguards. Prior inclusion retains evidentiary value. Special revision power includes intensive verification.

4. Court’s Findings  
- Legality of SIR: Upheld. ECI has power under Article 324 of the Constitution read with Section 21(3) of the RP Act, 1950. SIR "breathes life into the constitutional mandate under Article 324 within the precise statutory contours provided by Section 21(3)."  
- Constitutional Nexus: SIR bears direct nexus with free and fair elections. Electoral roll integrity is foundational to democracy.  
- Justification: Passage of 40+ years since last intensive revision, large-scale additions and deletions, urbanisation, and migration causing duplication justified the exercise.  
- Procedure: Calling for supporting material does not negate presumption of citizenship. It is a mechanism to reaffirm or correct entries. Safeguards of notice and hearing under Rule 21A preserved.  
- Lal Babu Hussein Case: Distinguished. Presumption of citizenship is rebuttable. That judgment did not foreclose verification.  
- Documents: Classification of acceptable documents not arbitrary. Linked to electoral integrity. Aadhaar already included per prior order.  
- Proportionality: SIR satisfies test of proportionality. Serves legitimate aim, measures not excessive, adequate safeguards present.  

- ECI and Citizenship: ECI empowered u/s 16, RP Act to examine citizenship for electoral roll purposes only. Negative finding affects voting rights alone. Does not divest citizenship or operate as final adjudication.

5. Directions Issued  
1. If ECI is not satisfied about a person’s eligibility, it must refer the individual to the Union Government for adjudication under the Citizenship Act.  
2. Any deletion on ground of doubtful citizenship shall remain subject to outcome of adjudication by competent authority.  
3. ECI to forward names of persons deleted from 2003 Bihar electoral rolls over doubtful citizenship to Central Government within 4 weeks.

6. Conclusion and Significance  
The Supreme Court did not interdict the SIR process. The exercise is lawful and within ECI’s statutory powers. ECI’s determination on citizenship is limited to electoral rolls and cannot assume finality on citizenship status. Judgment affirms ECI’s broad powers for roll purification and clarifies limits on citizenship adjudication.