New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Monday said that if any illegality is found in the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of the voter list in the election state of Bihar, then the entire process can be canceled. A bench of Justice Suryakant and Justice Joymalya Bagchi said that it is assuming that the Election Commission of India (ECI), being a constitutional body, must be following the law during SIR in Bihar.
The bench also clarified that it cannot stop the Election Commission of India from doing a similar process for revision of voter list across the country. The bench said that its decision in the Bihar SIR case will apply to SIR across the country.
Petitioners’ concerns on SIR for all states
During the hearing, senior advocate Rakesh Dwivedi, on behalf of the Election Commission, urged the bench to allow the Election Commission to complete the entire process and after its completion, the court will be able to better assess the process.
Senior advocate Gopal Sankaranarayanan, representing one of the petitioners, argued that as far as other states are concerned, the Election Commission is proceeding with the SIR and a meeting was held for all states on September 10. Sankaranarayanan said there is no question of proceeding with other states and arriving at a definite conclusion.
The bench said how can the court stop the Election Commission of India from carrying out a similar process in other parts of the country. The bench said, “Once this suspense period is over, how many people have been issued notices? How many of them have responded? How many of them have come forward to settle their claims…”
If Bihar SIR method is illegal, it will be cancelled
Advocate Vrinda Grover, appearing for one of the petitioners, said why should I, as a citizen living in Bihar, be prevented from voting in this election because an illegal procedure has been adopted.
To this, Justice Kant said that if any procedure is illegal, the court will cancel it and said, “We will definitely intervene…” Senior advocate AM Singhvi, appearing for one of the petitioners, sought an early detailed hearing of the case. Justice Kant said, “Wherever they are proposing to start the process and in the meantime, whatever decision we give, it will definitely be applicable there…”
The bench said that it may fix October 7 as the date to hear the final arguments on the validity of the SIR and refused to give any piecemeal opinion on the process.
Violation of Election Commission’s manual
At the same time, lawyer Prashant Bhushan argued that there is a gross violation of the rules as well as the Election Commission’s own manual and there is virtually no transparency in it. The bench said that as soon as it seeks a response from the Election Commission, it will tell a different story, so it will have to hear both the stories.
The bench said that it is assuming that the Election Commission, being a constitutional authority, was following the law during the SIR in Bihar. The bench said that in any case if they do not follow the rules and regulations, their statutory and constitutional obligation, then it will list the case and start hearing.
Issues raised over Aadhaar as identity proof
The Supreme Court refused to modify its September 8 order in which it had allowed the inclusion of Aadhaar card as the 12th document in the revision of voter list in Bihar and insisted that Aadhaar will be used only as a proof of identity. The bench said that this direction is only interim in nature and the issue of validity of the document as proof is still open in the SIR case.
Advocate Ashwini Kumar Upadhyay urged the bench to modify its direction on the ground that Aadhaar cannot be considered as proof of citizenship and it cannot be treated at par with other documents accepted by the election body.
To this, the bench said, “Driving licenses can be forged… ration cards can be forged. Many documents can be forged. Aadhaar should be used as permitted by law.” After hearing the submissions, the bench has scheduled the next hearing of the case on October 7. Let us tell you that the bench was hearing several petitions challenging the validity of Bihar SIR.
