SC issues notice, allows EC to continue with electoral roll revision in Bihar
SC directs ECI to accept Aadhaar, Voter ID and ration cards for Bihar's voter list revision; next hearing on 28 July.
PTI
-
The Supreme Court has now issued a notice to the ECI and granted it one week to file its response. ((ANI)
New Delhi, 10 July
The Supreme Court on Thursday allowed the Election Commission of India to continue with its Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls in Bihar calling it a "constitutional mandate".
A bench of Justices Sudhanshu Dhulia and Joymalya Bagchi, however,
questioned the timing of the exercise besides offering its prima facie view
that Aadhaar card, voter ID card and ration cards could be considered during
the SIR in Bihar.
"We are of the prima facie view that Aadhaar cards, voter ID
cards and the ration cards be allowed in the special intensive revision of
electoral rolls,” it said.
Noting that none of the petitioners, including leaders of 10
opposition parties, prayed for an interim stay of the poll panel’s exercise,
the bench sought response on the batch of petitions and posted the hearing on 28 July.
The ECI, the bench said, should file a counter affidavit to the
petitions by 21 July and rejoinders should be filed by 28 July.
"We are not doubting your sincerity but there are perceptions. We are not thinking of stopping you because it is a constitutional mandate," the bench told senior advocate Rakesh Dwivedi, appearing for the poll panel.
Dwivedi said 60 per cent of voters had verified their credentials
and assured the court none of the voter’s name will be removed from the
electoral rolls, without giving them a hearing.
"We cannot stop a constitutional body from doing what it is
supposed to do. Simultaneously, we will not let them do what they are not
supposed to do,” the bench said.
Earlier in the day, the bench questioned the poll panel on the
timing of the SIR drive in poll-bound Bihar saying it went to the "root of
democracy and power to vote" while rejecting the argument that the poll
panel did not have any power to carry it out.
The ECI also justified the exercise and said Aadhaar wasn't a
"proof of citizenship".
The bench questioned Dwivedi over the exclusion of Aadhaar card in
the SIR drive in Bihar and said the ECI had nothing to do with citizenship of a
person and it was the Ministry of Home Affairs' domain.
Dwivedi responded while referring to Article 326 of the
Constitution and said every voter has to be an Indian citizen and "Aadhaar
card is not proof of citizenship".
Justice Dhulia said, "If you are to check citizenship under
SIR of electoral rolls in Bihar, then you should have acted early; it is a bit
late."
The bench, in the meantime, rejected the submission of the
petitioners’ counsel that the ECI did not have power to conduct any such
exercise in Bihar for it was mandated under the Constitution and the last such
exercise happened in 2003.
While referring to the petitioners' contentions, the bench said
the ECI had to answer three questions as the SIR exercise in Bihar went to
"root of democracy and power to vote".
The questions of the petitioners, including political parties and
their leaders aside from civil society members and organisations, deal with the
ECI's power to conduct such an exercise and its timing.
Dwivedi said with passage of time, electoral rolls need to be
revised to look into inclusion or exclusion of voter names with the SIR being
the one exercise to do it.
He asked if the ECI did not have the power to revise the electoral
roll then who did.
The poll panel, however, assured the top court of not leaving out
anyone from the voter list without an opportunity to be heard.
At the outset, senior advocate Gopal Sankaranarayanan, appearing
for NGO 'Association for Democratic Reforms', said the revision of electoral
rolls can be permitted under the Representation of People Act.
The entire SIR will cover around 7.9 crore citizens, he said, and
even the voter ID and Aadhaar cards are not being considered.
Over 10 petitions have been filed in the SC, including one by NGO
'Association for Democratic Reforms', the lead petitioner.
Leave a Reply
Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *