The Association for Democratic Reforms (ADR) told the Supreme Court that the Election Commission’s voter list update in Bihar could unfairly remove lakhs of voters. ADR called the rejection of Aadhaar and ration cards “absurd” and warned of misuse of power by officials.
Thank you for reading this post, don't forget to subscribe!
NEW DELHI: In a major legal face-off before the Supreme Court, the Association for Democratic Reforms (ADR) has strongly opposed the Election Commission of India’s (ECI) decision to exclude Aadhaar and ration cards from valid documents in the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of voter lists in Bihar.
This revision comes just ahead of the state assembly elections set for October–November 2025. ADR has called this exclusion unjustified and dangerous for democracy.
ALSO READ: Bihar Voter List Update: 56 Lakh Names Set to Be Removed Ahead of Assembly Elections
The ECI had earlier submitted that Aadhaar and ration cards could be obtained using fake documents, and so were not reliable enough to be included in the process. Responding to this, ADR said that this reasoning was baseless because the 11 documents approved by the ECI are just as likely to be faked as Aadhaar or ration cards.
ADR argued,
“The fact that Aadhar card is one of the documents accepted for obtaining Permanent Residence Certificate, OBC/SC/ST Certificate and for passport – makes ECI’s rejection of Aadhar (which is most widely held document) under the instant SIR order patently absurd.”
The organisation pointed out that there is no proper system in the SIR process for checking the forms filled out by voters or verifying the documents they submit.
It warned that Electoral Registration Officers (EROs) have been given too much unchecked power, which could result in many genuine voters being wrongly removed from the rolls.
It also flagged a serious issue: one ERO is managing over 3 lakh applications, making proper verification almost impossible. ADR cited media reports that say many forms are being filled without the presence of voters.
“This lack of defined procedure enables EROs to act arbitrarily and to exercise their discretion in a manner that is susceptible to misuse and undermines the integrity of the electoral process and democracy which is a fundamental right,”
-the organisation said in its rejoinder.
Another big concern raised by ADR is that voters who are wrongly excluded won’t have enough time to appeal and get their names back on the list before elections.
The ECI had claimed that SIR was needed because of large-scale voter migration. However, ADR said that updating the voter list has always been a continuous process across the country and questioned why Bihar was being treated differently.
It warned that the three-month deadline given for the SIR was creating “huge risk of disenfranchisement” for eligible voters in Bihar.
“The exclusion of voters, as pointed out by the petitioners is currently playing out on the ground, with many electors without documents in no position to provide the same. With elections stated to be held in October-November 2025, there is no time for a large number of voters — both who do not have documents but have submitted form and whose names do not find a mention in draft roll to get themselves included in the rolls. Moreover, the impact of deletion of migrated electors can be substantial if they are clustered within a few constituencies and demographics.”
ADR also denied ECI’s claim that political parties had demanded this revision. It said the real concerns raised by parties were about fake voters being added, real voters supporting the opposition being deleted, and votes being cast after polling hours.
The NGO took a strong stand against the ECI’s interpretation of citizenship verification under Article 326 of the Constitution. It argued that during a similar case in Assam, the ECI had clearly said EROs are not responsible for checking citizenship.
“The stand taken by the Election Commission is also contrary to the judgment of a Constitution Bench of this Hon’ble Court in Inderjit Barua v. Election Commission of India, (1985) 1 SCC 21, wherein it was expressly held that presence on the existing electoral roll was prima facie proof of citizenship,”
-the rejoinder states.
ADR also claimed that the burden of proof of citizenship is being unfairly placed on existing voters, even though they had already gone through proper process.
“The said stand taken by ECI is contrary to this Hon’ble Court’s judgment in Lal Babu Hussain (1995) 3 SCC 100 where it was held that burden of proof of citizenship would be on those who are registering anew and not on those whose names are already on the electoral roll,”
-the ADR has argued.
At present, the Supreme Court is hearing multiple petitions that challenge the ECI’s SIR notification. The petitioners, including ADR, argue that it violates Articles 14, 19, 21, 325, and 326 of the Constitution, and breaks rules under the Representation of the People Act, 1950 and the Registration of Electors Rules, 1960.
ADR has strongly said that the current SIR process could arbitrarily remove lakhs of voters and harm the core idea of free and fair elections in India.
Meanwhile, the Election Commission is standing firm, defending its June 24, 2025 directive, and saying it has full powers under Article 324 of the Constitution and Section 21(3) of the Representation of the People Act, 1950 to carry out such revision.
The ECI told the court that the SIR is urgently needed due to urban migration, changes in population, and errors in the current voter list, which hasn’t seen a full revision for nearly 20 years. It said this update is crucial to ensure only eligible citizens vote in the upcoming Bihar elections.
CASE TITLE:
Association for Democratic Reforms and Ors. vs Election Commission of India and connected matters
W.P.(C) No. 640/2025 and connected matters
Would You Like Assistance In Drafting A Legal Notice Or Complaint?
CLICK HERE
Click Here to Read Our Reports on Bihar Voter List
Click Here to Read Our Reports on ECI & SIR
FOLLOW US ON YOUTUBE FOR MORE LEGAL UPDATES
