The Supreme Court on Friday took a decisive stance in the ongoing litigation over Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of Bihar’s electoral rolls, which has stirred widespread controversy over the exclusion of approximately 65 lakh voters from the draft list.
A two-judge bench, comprising Justices Surya Kant and Joymalya Bagchi, delivered fresh directives aimed at ensuring voter access to enfranchisement. The court ordered that the 12 recognised political parties in Bihar must instruct their booth-level agents (BLAs) to proactively assist individuals whose names were deleted from the draft rolls in filing Form 6 (claims for inclusion), including both physical and online submissions, accompanied by any one of the eleven documents specified by the Election Commission or an Aadhaar card.
The bench noted its astonishment that, despite having about 1.6 lakh BLAs deployed across the state, only two objections had been filed so far on behalf of excluded voters. Some political parties countered by saying that their BLAs were not being permitted to submit objections, an issue the Court responded to by directing Booth Level Officers (BLOs) to issue acknowledgement receipts for any physically submitted forms.
The top court also emphasised that the application window should be voter-friendly, allowing attendees to submit any of the 11 prescribed documents or Aadhaar for establishing identity and residence and crucially, enabling online submission as an alternative to physical forms.
During the hearing, senior advocate Rakesh Dwivedi, appearing for the Election Commission, provided data indicating that around 85,000 claim forms have already been submitted by excluded individuals, and more than 2 lakh new voters have registered under the SIR drive.
Dwivedi further said that not a single political party has filed any objection. It is the duty of political parties to come to the aid of the ECI, he added.
“There are 1.6 lakh BLAs, and if each verifies 10 claims. We don't mean to exclude anything that cannot be. ERO shall not delete any entry from the draft roll without inquiring and affording an opportunity to be heard for them," he added.
“Also, individuals have to come forward and explain. If you are registered somewhere else, you must explain, like I forgot to remove my name at the older place for Maha Kumbh or Durga Puja, people know. They come forward. They don't have to be told; same is with elections," Dwivedi further said.
Advocate Prashant Bhushan, appearing for Association for Democratic Reforms, said that many people would still not be aware of the process. He highlighted that the ECI is now asking people with claims to file Form 6 for fresh entry, and a declaration along with Aadhaar.
"They say 85,000 people have come forward. Many are migrant workers and working outside the state. There are floods in many districts of Bihar," he added.
The Court remarked that political parties with their BLAs can assist the people. The political workers at rural level are in the best position to assist, he added.
Also read
- Woman doctor, whose hijab was pulled down by CM Nitish Kumar, fails to join duty
- Bihar hijab row: Mehbooba Mufti slams Giriraj Singh, says Union minister wants 'Kaurav Rajya' not 'Ram Rajya'
- Bihar hijab row | Omar Abdullah lashes out at Nitish Kumar: 'How can you lay hands on woman?'
- Why did BJP pick five-time Bihar MLA Nitin Nabin as its new national working president?
"We are surprised at the inaction of political parties. After appointing BLAs, what are they doing...Why distance between political workers and the local people?" Justice Kant remarked.
The Court, however, reiterated that voter confidence hinges on transparency and active outreach, and mandated that all political parties file a status report by the next hearing on September 8, detailing the claims they have assisted in filing.
The Court’s direction to involve political parties in assisting excluded voters underscores the principle that protecting voting rights requires active civic participation, not just institutional processes. Parties’ failure to facilitate submissions raises concerns about both organizational apathy and political calculation.
Today's Supreme Court order significantly shifts the dynamics of Bihar’s SIR process from passive oversight to active facilitation. By compelling political parties to assist excluded voters, permitting digital access, and tightening administrative processes, the Court reaffirmed that safeguarding enfranchisement requires not just procedural correctness, but participatory accountability.
