Bihar SIR under scanner

The recent intervention by the Supreme Court of India in the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls in Bihar throws a sharp spotlight on the tension between administrative authority and constitutional propriety. As petitions file against the Election Commission of India’s (ECI) implementation of the SIR exercise, questions of legality, transparency, and procedural fairness take center stage-raising profound concerns about the integrity of democratic processes. At the heart of the legal debate lies the issue of statutory competence. Petitioners, led by the Association for Democratic Reforms (ADR), contend that the ECI’s exclusion of widely accepted identity documents-Aadhaar, Voter ID, and ration card-from the verification list lacks legal justification and violates principles of natural justice. Senior Advocate Gopal Sankaranarayanan aptly described the move as arbitrary, pointing out its inconsistency with evidence law and established norms of public administration. These documents, ubiquitous in governmental and civil transactions, form the bedrock of identity verification for millions. Their exclusion defies logic, especially when no clear statutory basis is offered under the Representation of the People Act, 1950 or its attendant rules. If the concern for obtaining a ‘genuine’ list minus the names of those with doubtful antecedents, then there is no reason why the ECI should not undertake the exercise at least a year ahead of the scheduled polls and with absolute transparency and fairness. The controversial SIR has only created misgivings among political parties and the ECI needs to take note that it is there to ensure free and fair polls. The Supreme Court’s preliminary observations signal unease with what appears to be an overreach. The Court has questioned whether the ECI’s current exercise is backed by delegated powers or veers beyond its constitutional mandate. More troubling is the hasty nature of the revision, which includes compressed timelines for drafting rolls, filing objections, and finalizing the list. With Bihar’s state elections looming in November 2025, the revision’s rushed execution risks disenfranchising voters and undermines administrative due process. The exclusion of Aadhaar and Voter ID from the validation list raises serious concerns. These documents are not only legally recognized but have been repeatedly upheld by statutory and judicial standards as valid forms of identification. Their omission creates a scenario ripe for selective interpretation and administrative bias, prompting fears of politically motivated exclusion. The Court’s directive to reinstate them into the accepted list is more than a procedural correction-it is a reaffirmation of democratic norms. Furthermore, the revision’s disproportionate targeting of voters registered post-2003 evokes concerns about systemic unfairness. The narrative of cleansing voter rolls of ‘doubtful antecedents,’ absent transparent criteria or oversight, risks morphing into a tool of exclusion rather than inclusion. It amplifies the perception that the ECI may be acting less as a neutral arbiter and more as a facilitator of prevailing political interests-a troubling trajectory for any democratic institution. As the Supreme Court continues its scrutiny, the outcome will have far-reaching implications-not just for Bihar but for the credibility of electoral governance nationwide. At stake is the very principle that electoral processes must be governed by law, not expediency, and that institutional authority must always submit to constitutional boundaries.