The Supreme Court on Monday directed the Bihar Legal Services Authority to deploy para-legal volunteers across districts to assist voters and political parties in filing claims and objections during the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls. The volunteers will also submit confidential reports to district judges, which will be reviewed on September 8.
A bench of Justices Surya Kant and Joymalya Bagchi observed that the confusion over the revision exercise was largely a trust issue and urged political parties to be more proactive.
During the hearing, the Election Commission of India informed the court that although the September 1 deadline for claims and objections had formally lapsed, applications could still be filed. However, the Commission clarified that such applications would only be processed after the rolls are finalised and may be entertained until the last date of nomination in each constituency.
Election Commission refuted the Rashtriya Janata Dal’s (RJD) claim that it had submitted 36 objections in Bihar’s SIR of electoral rolls, stating that only 10 had been received and all were duly accepted. It further noted that most objections filed by political parties related to exclusion rather than inclusion of names in the draft rolls, published on August 1.
The proceedings stemmed from a petition by RJD MP Manoj Jha, who contended that the SIR was hasty and ill-timed, and risked disenfranchising crores of voters. He argued that the insistence on 11 specific documents to prove citizenship excluded widely used identity papers such as Aadhaar, MNREGA job cards, and ration cards, creating hurdles for Bihar’s rural and poor electorate.
Both the RJD and AIMIM had sought an extension of the deadline for filing claims and objections ahead of the upcoming state elections.
The core dispute
The SIR exercise, mandated by the ECI, is meant to clean up electoral rolls by removing duplicate or ineligible voters and allowing fresh eligible voters to be added. But in Bihar, opposition parties allege the process has turned into a rushed and opaque exercise, risking disenfranchisement of genuine electors.
The RJD told the court that ECI’s daily updates showed an unprecedented surge in claims in the final week, indicating that many voters were either unaware of deletions or did not have adequate time and support to respond. The party cited that over 1 lakh claims were filed in the past week alone, with 33,349 applications coming in just the last two days.
It argued that unless the period was extended, wrongfully deleted genuine electors would be denied the right to vote in the upcoming assembly elections, effectively undermining the democratic process.
ECI’s stand
The Election Commission has opposed the demand for an extension, but in a significant concession, it informed the court that revision forms submitted after the September 1 deadline would not be rejected and would be processed before the final list is published.
On paper, this assurance deflates the immediate urgency for extension. Yet, parties remain sceptical. They argue that voters in rural and semi-urban areas, particularly those with limited digital access, may not even know that their names have been deleted or that late submissions are being entertained.
Supreme Court’s balancing act
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?
The court’s order activating para-legal volunteers reflects a pragmatic approach. Instead of immediately intervening in ECI’s timelines, the bench sought to strengthen the support infrastructure for voters. Volunteers deployed through the Bihar Legal Services Authority can potentially bridge the gap between citizens and the bureaucratic machinery, especially in districts where awareness is low and access to legal or electoral aid is minimal.
However, the court has not yet ruled out the possibility of granting further directions. By keeping the matter pending till September 8, it has left room to revisit the deadline issue depending on how the ECI handles late claims and whether significant exclusion trends persist.