During the Supreme Court hearing on Bihar’s Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls, Justice Surya Kant asked Abhishek Manu Singhvi, “Are you representing the Bharatiya Janata Party?” prompting laughter from Kapil Sibal, who quipped, “Probably not.”
New Delhi: The Supreme Court continued to hear the ongoing controversy regarding the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls in Bihar on Saturday. The matter came up before a bench of Justices Surya Kant and Joymalya Bagchi, which is hearing a batch of petitions challenging the Election Commission’s directive issued on June 24.
During the hearing, the bench expressed surprise that the political parties, which had earlier made a lot of noise on this issue, were not actively coming forward in the court proceedings.
The judges asked the lawyers which party they were representing and pointed out the lack of proper representation by political parties in the matter. Justice Surya Kant observed that it was surprising that political parties were not taking responsibility to address the issue of large-scale deletion of voters’ names under the SIR process.
The Election Commission, represented by senior advocate Rakesh Dwivedi, informed the court that during the SIR exercise in Bihar, the names of 85,000 new voters were revealed.
However, only two objections were filed by booth-level agents (BLAs) of political parties. The bench responded that the revision process must be “voter-friendly” and political parties should also participate more responsibly.
According to LiveLaw, senior advocate Prashant Bhushan appeared on behalf of the Association for Democratic Reforms (ADR), while senior advocate Rakesh Dwivedi represented the Election Commission.
At this stage, Justice Surya Kant, who is set to become the next Chief Justice of India after CJI B.R. Gavai retires later this year, asked:
“How many political parties are in front of us in the courtroom?”
Responding to this, senior advocate Kapil Sibal said:
“I am on behalf of RJD.”
Senior advocate Abhishek Manu Singhvi then added:
“There are eight opposition parties in the second petition… There are AAP, Congress, SP, UBT and most are recognised parties.”
To this, Justice Surya Kant remarked:
“So you are in the best position to tell us how many people have raised objections… How many BLAs have been appointed?”
Clarifying the situation, senior advocate Rakesh Dwivedi explained:
“MPs have filed the petition, not political parties.”
Justice Surya Kant then started asking each lawyer about the party they were representing. Kapil Sibal clarified that he was representing RJD MP Manoj Jha, and not the RJD party itself.
At this point, Justice Surya Kant turned to Abhishek Manu Singhvi and asked:
“Are you representing the Bharatiya Janata Party?”
Hearing this, Kapil Sibal burst out laughing in the courtroom and said: “Probably not.” This remark lightened the otherwise serious atmosphere during the hearing.
Later, advocate Nizam Pasha told the bench:
“I am on behalf of AIMIM, although it is not recognized in the state.”
Justice Surya Kant then observed:
“In a way, out of 12, only three political parties are here in front of us.”
The Supreme Court asked the political parties to actively assist voters in Bihar whose names were deleted from the rolls and to file their claims.
The bench also directed the Chief Electoral Officer (CEO) of Bihar to include political parties in the proceedings and submit a status report regarding the claims. Additionally, the court instructed the Election Commission to provide proper receipts whenever booth-level agents of political parties file objections or claims.
Read More Reports On CJI BR Gavai
FOLLOW US ON YOUTUBE FOR MORE LEGAL UPDATES
