BJP leader Ashwini Upadhyay files PIL urging the Supreme Court to mandate regular special revision of electoral rolls to bar illegal infiltrators from voting. Petition argues that only genuine Indian citizens should influence elections, citing demographic changes across 200 districts.
New Delhi: Today, on July 8, At a time when several opposition parties, senior leaders, and civil society groups have approached the Supreme Court against the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls in Bihar, Delhi BJP leader and Supreme Court Advocate Ashwini Upadhyay has taken a completely different stance by filing a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) in favour of the drive.
While the Opposition has strongly criticized the Election Commission of India’s (ECI) recent efforts to revise electoral lists in Bihar — calling it arbitrary, opaque, and potentially disenfranchising — Upadhyay’s petition supports such special revision efforts.
ALSO READ: Election Commission of India Invites MP Mahua Moitra After Supreme Court Order
He has also sought directions from the apex court to institutionalize this practice on a regular basis across India, especially before Lok Sabha, Assembly, and local body elections.
Upadhyay mentioned his plea before a vacation bench comprising Justices Sudhanshu Dhulia and Joymala Bagchi. He urged the bench to club his PIL with the batch of petitions filed by opposition parties and NGOs which are already listed for hearing on July 10.
The bench responded by asking Upadhyay to first rectify the defects in his petition and request the registry for it to be heard on the same day.
In his PIL, Upadhyay argued that after independence, around 200 districts and 1,500 tehsils across India have witnessed major demographic shifts due to illegal immigration, forced religious conversions, and rapid population growth.
According to him, this shift threatens the fundamental nature of Indian democracy, as foreign nationals might end up influencing elections.
His plea reads,
“Demography is destiny, and dozens of districts have already seen their destiny being shaped by those who aren’t Indians. It is through elections that a nation shapes its politics and policy, and therefore, it is constitutional duty of the Centre, State and ECI to ensure that only genuine citizens cast their vote in Parliamentary, State Assembly and Local Body elections, not the foreigners. For this, Special Intensive Scrutiny of Electoral Rolls, from time to time, is necessary,”
Upadhyay’s petition further requests the Supreme Court to pass directions to all state governments to act strictly against individuals who assist illegal infiltrators in obtaining fake identity documents, thereby helping them get enrolled as voters.
The PIL seeks three main reliefs:
- A direction to the Election Commission of India to conduct ‘Special Intensive Revision of Electoral Rolls’ at Regular Intervals throughout the Country, particularly before the Parliamentary, State Assembly and Local Body Elections, in order to ensure that only Indian citizens decide the polity and policy, not the illegal foreign infiltrators.
- A directive to all state governments to take stringent steps against the panders, who facilitate and provide fake documents to illegal foreign infiltrators.
- Any other direction that the Court may find fit in the interest of justice.
On the other hand, several top opposition leaders and activists have filed petitions in the Supreme Court challenging the SIR drive in Bihar, alleging it lacks transparency, is being done in a hurried manner, and could remove lakhs of genuine voters from the rolls.
Among the prominent leaders challenging the revision are Congress leader KC Venugopal, Supriya Sule from the NCP, D Raja of the CPI, Arvind Sawant (Shiv Sena UBT), Harinder Malik (Samajwadi Party), Sarfraz Ahmed (JMM), Dipankar Bhattacharya (CPI-ML), and representatives from the DMK. NGOs like the People’s Union for Civil Liberties (PUCL), and activists such as Prashant Bhushan (ADR), TMC MP Mahua Moitra, and Yogendra Yadav were among the first to move the court.
According to these petitions, the revision has been carried out without following due process or offering transparency.
The petitioners argue that this could harm the upcoming elections’ fairness and weaken democratic participation.
They raise alarm over the SIR order dated June 24, 2025, stating:
“The SIR order dated 24.06.2025 if not set aside, can arbitrarily and without due process disenfranchise lakhs of voters from electing their representatives, thereby disrupting free and fair elections and democracy in the country, which are part of basic structure of the Constitution.”
They further allege that
“the documentation requirements of the directive, lack of due process as well as the unreasonably short timeline for the said Special Intensive Revision of Electoral Roll in Bihar further make this exercise bound to result in removal of names of lakhs of genuine voters from electoral rolls leading to their disenfranchisement.”
The upcoming Supreme Court hearing on July 10 is expected to bring together a host of petitions both challenging and supporting the SIR process.
While one side is calling it essential to protect the sanctity of elections from illegal infiltration, the other is warning against mass disenfranchisement and potential misuse of the revision process for political gain.
CASE TITLE:
Ashwini Kumar Upadhyay v. Union of India Diary No. 36126 of 2025
Click Here to Read Previous Reports on Election
