The Bombay High Court has declined an oral prayer for an interim stay on deletions of voters’ names in a public interest petition highlighting flaws in the implementation of the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) in Maharashtra, saying it will follow judicial propriety and let the Supreme Court hear the matter first.
Thank you for reading this post, don't forget to subscribe!
Mumbai: The Bombay High Court on Monday declined to pass an interim order on a public interest petition highlighting alleged flaws in the implementation of the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls in Maharashtra, with the Chief Justice observing that no purpose would be served by parallel litigation while the Supreme Court is seized of the issue [Petition on flaws in implementation of SIR in Maharashtra].
A Division Bench of Chief Justice Mahesh Chandra Tripathi and Justice Advait Sethna heard the matter, in which Advocate Prakash Ambedkar appeared for the petitioner. The matter was adjourned for four weeks. The petitioner’s contentions below are untested, and the Court expressed no view on the merits.
The petitioner’s case
The petition, filed through Advocate Hitendra Gandhi on behalf of two Mumbai businessmen, does not seek to stop the SIR exercise. It seeks disclosure of the order and recorded reasons under which the SIR is being conducted in Maharashtra, transparency about its methodology and legal basis, and safeguards against the wrongful exclusion of eligible voters, including restoration of improperly deleted names.
It contends that the Election Commission of India (ECI) may make a limited electoral assessment but cannot conclusively determine citizenship, and that where doubt remains the matter must be referred to the competent authority under the Citizenship Act, 1955. It also alleges that, although the ECI’s Maharashtra instructions do not permit the collection of documents during enumeration, Booth Level Officers have been asking citizens to furnish supporting documents. The ECI’s response is not on record.
Bombay High Court SIR Plea: ‘Let The SC Hear The Matter First’
When the petitioner’s counsel sought an interim stay on deletions of voters’ names, the Chief Justice observed:
“There are restraining orders already… No purpose will be served by a parallel litigation. Let the SC hear the matter first and we will consider it later.”
Declining the oral prayer for interim relief, the Chief Justice added:
“No no no…we are not going to pass any such orders… We will follow judicial propriety.”
Case: Public interest petition on flaws in implementation of SIR in Maharashtra (case title and number not available)
Bench: Chief Justice Mahesh Chandra Tripathi and Justice Advait Sethna
Date of Hearing: October 5, 2026 | Adjourned by four weeks
For the Petitioner: Advocate Prakash Ambedkar