Supreme Court Special Intensive Revision Hearing LIVE Updates: The Supreme Court said the Election Commission has the power to conduct a Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls.
The petitions challenge the legality of the SIR exercise undertaken by the poll body, contending that the revision process exceeds the powers conferred upon the EC under Article 326 of the Constitution, the Representation of the People Act, 1950, and the rules framed thereunder.
The controversy primarily centres around the EC's requirement that voters whose names were absent from the 2002 electoral rolls - or the 2003 rolls in certain states - must establish ancestral linkage to a person whose name appeared in those electoral rolls.
Follow LIVE Updates On Supreme Court Verdict Here:
Key Takeaways From Supreme Court Order
- EC has power to conduct SIR of electoral rolls under constitutional scheme and Representation of the People Act.
- Agrees with EC's reasons for SIR, says rapid urbanisation, migration are valid reasons for it.
- Free, fair polls depend upon integrity, accuracy and credibility of electoral rolls.
- We are satisfied that impugned SIR exercise meets requirements of proportionality.
- We hold that impugned exercise was founded upon legitimate, constitutionally grounded purpose, namely restoration of accuracy.
- Process that may initially appear exclusionary can, through appropriate safeguards, be rendered constitutionally compliant.
- We are unable to conclude that impugned exercise is a process resorted to solely for administrative convenience.
"Exclusion From Voter List Doesn't Mean Citizenship Ends": Supreme Court On SIR
The Election Commission is empowered to examine citizenship, the Supreme Court ruled on Wednesday, underlining that the said power is subject to judicial review.
The top court made it clear that an exclusion from a voter list does not mean that a person loses citizenship.
"If a citizen does not appear on electoral roll that does not mean the citizen was unable to prove his citizenship, but shows the inability of the Election Commission to verify citizenship," the court said.
Those excluded from voter list, the court said, should be dealt with in accordance to law.
Poll Body Did Not Act In Excess Of Powers, Rules Top Court
The Supreme Court said the impugned SIR does not supplant the Representation of the People Act and the Rules. "Rather, it breathes life into the constitutional mandate under Article 324 within the precise statutory contours provided by Section 21(3). Therefore, it cannot be said that the Commission has acted in excess of its statutory powers," the Court held.
Three Questions Before The Court And Their Answers
Question: Does the Election Commission have the power to conduct SIR?
Court's Answer: Yes.
Question: Whether the inquiry under the SIR is founded on a legitimate purpose and, if so, whether the measures adopted by the Election Commission are proportionate to the ends sought to be achieved.
Court's Answer: Yes
Question: Whether the procedure adopted by the Election Commission in conducting the inquiry under the SIR is contrary to or in violation of the provisions of the Representation of the People Act, 1950.
Court's Answer: No.
The Bench stated, "Having examined the statutory scheme and the relevant constitutional provisions, we may now proceed to answer the important question formulated earlier by us, namely whether the impugned SIR is in direct conflict with the Representation of the People Act, 1950 and the Rules framed thereunder, and whether it supplants the statutory framework governing revision of electoral rolls. Both these questions, in our view, must be answered in the negative."
"SIR Breathes Life Into Constitution": Top Court
The Supreme Court, while pronouncing a judgment on a batch of petitions challenging the legality of the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of the electoral rolls done by the Election Commission, said the exercise "breathes life into the Constitution of the country."
The Court had examined whether the EC has the powers under Article 326 of the Constitution, the Representation of the People Act, 1950 and the Rules made thereunder to carry out the SIR in the present form.
Top Court To Deliver Verdict On Pleas Challenging Poll Roll Revision
The Supreme Court is set to deliver a crucial verdict on Wednesday on a series of petitions challenging the Election Commission of India's (ECI) move to carry out a Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls.
A Bench of Chief Justice of India (CJI) Surya Kant and Justice Joymalya Bagchi is scheduled to pronounce its verdict on Wednesday after reserving judgment in the matter earlier this year, following extensive hearings.
The petitions challenge the legality of the SIR exercise undertaken by the poll body, contending that the revision process exceeds the powers conferred upon the ECI under Article 326 of the Constitution, the Representation of the People Act, 1950, and the rules framed thereunder.
The controversy primarily centres around the ECI's requirement that voters whose names were absent from the 2002 electoral rolls — or the 2003 rolls in certain states — must establish ancestral linkage to a person whose name appeared in those electoral rolls.
