Today, On 14th August, In the Bihar Special Intensive Revision case, the Supreme Court told the Election Commission that people have a right to know and urged it to publish online the names of voters whose names were deleted from the rolls.
New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Thursday requested the Election Commission of India (ECI) to provide information about the documents used during the intensive electoral roll revision in Bihar in 2003.
A bench consisting of Justices Surya Kant and Joymalya Bagchi resumed hearing pleas that challenge the ECI’s decision on June 24 to conduct a special intensive revision (SIR) in the state.
Justice Kant pointed out, ‘People have a right to know’ that there is a narrative that family members do not know that their kin have been deleted as dead in the draft roll.
He said,
“If you put the names on the website, in the public domain, the narrative disappears,”
Justice Bagchi observed,
“It is important to give the widest possible publicity to reasons why people have been left out of the draft roll. People have a right to know. For a migrant worker who has been deleted as dead, even if he is illiterate, his neighbours or friends would alert him.”
Justice Kant also stated,
“Citizens’ right to know should not be dependent on Booth Level Agents of political parties.”
While hearing petitions challenging the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of voter lists in poll-bound Bihar, Justice Surya Kant observed that the Election Commission has informed the court that out of the 65 lakh names removed from the list, 22 lakh people have died.
He questioned,
“If 22 lakh people have died, why is it not disclosed at the booth level? We do not want citizens’ right to be dependent on political parties.”
In its order, the bench recorded that after briefly hearing the Election Commission of India, certain interim steps were agreed upon.
As an interim measure, the ECI will display the list of approximately 65 lakh voters whose names were present in the 2025 list but are missing from the draft list on the respective district-level websites.
The list will be arranged district-wise, with booth-wise details accessible through the EPIC number. The reason for the non-inclusion of each name will also be shown.
To ensure public awareness, the court directed that this information should be widely publicised in daily newspapers in vernacular and local languages across Bihar. Newspapers with wide circulation must be chosen, and the information should also be broadcast on TV and radio.
Additionally, if any election officer maintains an official social media account, the details must be displayed there as well.
Justice Kant remarked that the information should be made available on the websites of State, District, and sub-divisional level Election Commission (EC) officers.
Justice Bagchi urged,
“Please provide an enumerated list of individuals removed from the draft roll along with the reasons for their deletion,”
He emphasized that without such a list, even unintentional errors cannot be rectified before the final list is published, as the affected individuals would be unaware of the changes.
Justice Bagchi pointed out that the current system only provides query-based results, meaning that if someone inputs a specific EPIC number, they can check if that person is in the draft roll.
He stated,
“We are requesting the publication of the complete data seteverything,”
Justice Kant questioned why voters should rely on the availability of local Booth Level Officers (BLOs). By providing names and reasons for deletions, the need for manual intervention would be significantly reduced.
He suggested,
“You could issue a public notice to inform the public about the website where deleted names will be listed. Additionally, you could mention that while Aadhaar and EPIC cards are not definitive proof, they can still be submitted,”
Earlier, The court remarked that expanding the list of acceptable identity documents from seven to eleven for Bihar’s Special Intensive Revision (SIR) was “voter-friendly and not exclusionary.”
As the debate over the SIR intensified, the bench asserted that the ECI has the authority to conduct such exercises as it sees fit. The bench also rejected a petitioner’s claim that the SIR of electoral rolls in Bihar, which is approaching elections, lacked legal foundation and should be annulled.
Opposition leaders, including those from the Rashtriya Janata Dal (RJD) and the Congress, as well as the NGO Association of Democratic Reforms (ADR), have contested the electoral roll revision initiative in Bihar.
Today, The Bench concluded by saying,
“Let us consider all this next Friday.”
Case Title: ASSOCIATION FOR DEMOCRATIC REFORMS AND ORS. Versus ELECTION COMMISSION OF INDIA, W.P.(C) No. 640/2025 (and connected cases)
FOLLOW US ON YOUTUBE FOR MORE LEGAL UPDATES
