Today, On 8th September, Supreme Court orders inclusion of Aadhaar as the 12th document in Bihar SIR, saying “It will be used only as proof of identity”; directs ECI to issue instructions today, next hearing fixed for September 15.
New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Monday ordered that Aadhaar will now be treated as the 12th document for verification in the ongoing Special Summary Revision (SIR) of the electoral roll in Bihar.
The apex court also instructed the Election Commission of India (ECI) to formally announce that Aadhaar will be accepted as a valid identity proof for adding voters to the revised electoral roll being compiled as part of the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) in Bihar.
A bench comprising Justices Surya Kant and Joymlaya Bagchi specified that Aadhaar will serve as the twelfth identity proof document, supplementing the eleven other ID documents recognized by the ECI for the Bihar voters list.
The Court also clarified that while Aadhaar can be used as proof of residence, it does not establish citizenship, a point that was agreed upon by all parties involved.
Furthermore, the ECI has the authority to verify the authenticity of the Aadhaar cards submitted to ensure they are not counterfeit, as stated by the Court.
The Court ordered,
“Aadhaar card shall be accepted…for purpose of acceptance of inclusion or exclusion in revised list…Aadhaar card shall be treated as 12th document …However, it is clarified that the authorities shall be entitled to verify the authenticity and genuineness of the Aadhaar card itself and Aadhaar will not be proof of citizenship…ECI shall issue instructions during the course of the day,”
The Court was hearing a series of petitions contesting the Bihar Special Intensive Revision (SIR) initiative.
Today, Senior Advocate Kapil Sibal argued that Booth Level Officers (BLOs) were in serious violation of the court’s order by refusing to accept claims from excluded voters who presented Aadhaar cards as proof of residence.
Sibal asserted that election officials were instructed not to recognize Aadhaar as valid identification unless it was accompanied by one of the eleven other identity documents specified by the ECI.
He said,
“We are racing against time. Is Aadhaar acceptable or not, lordships will have to decide. What they are doing is very shocking, we have prepared a note,”
Justice Kant inquired whether the petitioners were asserting that Aadhaar should be recognized as proof of citizenship.
Sibal responded,
“No, no, (it is only for proof of) residence. Citizenship can’t be decided by Booth Level Agents anyway, that is by Central government. Nothing to do with citizenship. Aadhaar should be accepted as place of residence proof so that I can vote. 11 documents plus Aadhaar, that’s all we want, nothing more than that,”
Sibal further noted that Booth Level Officers (BLOs) had indicated that Aadhaar would not be accepted as the sole proof of identity.
Sibal argued,
“Show-cause notices have been issued by ECI to (election) officers for accepting Aadhaar…This is despite three orders of this court…This is because there is no instruction by the Election Commission to accept Aadhaar…The document which is universal in nature is not being accepted!…We have 24 affidavits from separate districts saying that they went with Aadhaar (and it was not accepted),”
In response, Senior Advocate Rakesh Dwivedi, representing the ECI, strongly countered Sibal’s claims.
Dwivedi stated,
“We have advertised…We can file it…Aadhaar can be digitally uploaded…Only thing is, Aadhaar we are not considering as proof of citizenship. We don’t accept the contention that Election Commission is not empowered for purposes of electoral roll to decide if a person is citizen or not,”
The Court pointed out that the show cause notice only referenced eleven documents as proof of identity.
The Court remarked,
“Why does this show cause refer to only the 11 documents? We would like you to clarify. We have repeatedly clarified that the list part of the SIR illustratively indicates 11 documents. Apart from passport and birth certificate (in the list of 11 documents), none of them are conclusively proof of citizenship,”
Dwivedi responded,
“I (ECI) have not prevented them from filing Aadhaar.”
The Court observed,
“We clarified that include Aadhaar…But this seems (to indicate otherwise).”
In response, Dwivedi stated,
“We will find out if someone is errant somewhere.”
Advocate Ashwini Upadhyay raised concerns about the use of forged Aadhaar cards by foreigners, claiming,
“All these Aadhaar cards have been forged by paying Rs.1,000. All these Rohingyas and Bangladeshis…”
The Court noted that Aadhaar is mentioned in the Representation of Peoples Act, 1951 (RP Act), which oversees the conduct of elections in India.
The Court stated,
“You can never argue Aadhar is alien to RP Act. (Election) Forms itself refer to Aadhaar. And one of provisions of the Act specifically refers to Aadhaar as proof of residence,”
Advocate Vrinda Grover added,
“Only the poor are being eliminated (by not accepting Aadhaar as proof of identity).”
Dwivedi retorted,
“We know who is the poor here.”
He reiterated that the Election Commission of India (ECI) has made it clear that Aadhaar can be submitted as proof of identity during the SIR process.
He remarked,
“Your lordships have passed an order, we have advertised,”
Sibal argued,
“They (ECI) have to issue a direction that this is the 12th document…Send a circular.”
Senior Advocate Gopal Sankaranarayanan insisted that Aadhaar must be explicitly recognized as the twelfth document in the ECI’s list of acceptable documents for voter identity verification.
He expressed concern that without the Court’s directive, the acceptance of Aadhaar might be disregarded.
He contended,
“You have officers on ground, told a magic number of 11 documents. Lordships have thrice said that the 12th document (is Aadhaar). Please mention in the order (that this is the twelfth document). Otherwise, it will not trickle down,”
Earlier, On August 6, the Court learned that 6.5 million names were removed from the draft electoral roll published on August 1. The ECI assured the Court that no names would be removed without prior notice, an opportunity for a hearing, and a reasoned order from the appropriate authority.
The Election Commission of India (ECI), On 24 June 2025, started a Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of the electoral rolls in Bihar before the Assembly elections. Under this process, voters were asked to provide updated documents, but many citizens did not have them.
Opposition parties and several NGOs criticised this move, saying it could deprive a large number of genuine voters of their right to vote. They approached the Supreme Court (SC), calling the ECI’s action arbitrary and against the Constitution.
The Commission, On 1 August 2025, released the draft electoral roll, which showed a total of 7.24 crore registered voters. At the same time, around 65 lakh names were removed from the list.
Petitioners, including the Association for Democratic Reforms (ADR), requested the Supreme Court to order the ECI to make public the full list of voters whose names were dropped, along with the reasons for each deletion. They said that without such transparency, many citizens might lose their right to vote without being given a fair chance to object.
Case Title: ASSOCIATION FOR DEMOCRATIC REFORMS AND ORS. Versus ELECTION COMMISSION OF INDIA, W.P.(C) No. 640/2025 (and connected cases)
Click Here to Read Previous Reports on Bihar SIR Row
FOLLOW US ON YOUTUBE FOR MORE LEGAL UPDATES
