The Supreme Court heard petitions challenging the Special Intensive Revision of Bihar’s electoral rolls, raising concerns about de novo preparation of voter lists and citizenship checks. Petitioners argued the process is arbitrary, excludes voters, and exceeds the Election Commission’s statutory powers.
The Supreme Court resumed hearing ADR’s challenge to Bihar’s Special Intensive Revision of electoral rolls, raising concerns over transparency, Aadhaar use, and voter deletions. Senior advocates warned that shifting the burden of proving citizenship to voters threatens the constitutional right to vote.
The Supreme Court resumed hearing ADR-led petitions challenging the Special Intensive Revision of electoral rolls in Bihar, focusing on the limits of the Election Commission’s powers. The Bench examined whether the SIR process violates constitutional principles of manifest arbitrariness and voter rights.
The Supreme Court resumed hearing the ADR petition questioning voter verification norms and electoral transparency. Senior Advocate Rakesh defended the SIR process, while the Court stressed equality, inclusion, and citizens’ right to vote.
The Supreme Court slammed Prashant Bhushan for calling the Election Commission a ‘despot’, stating “Let’s not make sweeping statements” while hearing the case. The Bench also reminded him to “confine your submissions to pleadings” during the sharp exchange in court.
Petitioners allege dead people were shown submitting voter forms in Bihar’s electoral roll revision. Supreme Court hears claims of mass forgery and looming disenfranchisement.
