New Delhi: The Supreme Court has advanced the hearing in a case concerning the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls in Delhi to October 28. The petition seeks a direction to the Election Commission of India (ECI) to make public the list of voters who were issued notices during the SIR exercise, along with the specific reasons for each notice.
On Wednesday, senior advocate Prashant Bhushan, appearing for the petitioners, mentioned the matter before a bench comprising Chief Justice of India Justice Surya Kant and Justice Joymalya Bagchi. He urged the court to hear the case before October 30, the deadline for filing claims and objections under the SIR exercise in Delhi. The bench advanced the hearing to October 28. When Bhushan requested an even earlier hearing, the court observed that it was considering passing an order that would address the issue.
Plea Seeks Restoration of Names Deleted During SIR
The petitioners have filed an application in the pending case, raising concerns over the procedure for restoring names to the electoral rolls. They have sought a direction that voters whose names were already included in the electoral rolls but were subsequently deleted during the SIR exercise should not be required to submit a declaration meant for first-time applicants. The application calls for an appropriate mechanism and a separate declaration process for restoring the names of previously registered voters. It also seeks a direction that an otherwise valid claim for inclusion or restoration should not be rejected solely because the applicant has not submitted the additional SIR declaration form.
Form 6 is used by eligible individuals to apply for inclusion in the electoral roll. The petitioners have argued that requiring previously enrolled voters to submit declarations intended for first-time applicants may be inappropriate in such cases.
Deadline for Claims and Objections Extended to October 30
On September 26, the Election Commission extended the deadline for filing claims and objections under the ongoing SIR exercise in Delhi by one month, setting October 30 as the revised cut-off date. The final electoral roll is scheduled to be published on December 4. Bhushan informed the Supreme Court that notice had been issued on the main petition on September 22 and that the matter was expected to come up for hearing around October 30. Given the approaching deadline for claims and objections, he requested the court to intervene before the process reached its next stage.
Questions Raised Over Notices Based on ‘Logical Discrepancies’
The case stems from a petition filed by Anjali Bhardwaj and Amrita Johri. The petition seeks disclosure of the criteria, definitions, algorithmic parameters and operational guidelines used to classify voters under the category of ‘logical discrepancies’. During the September 22 hearing, the Supreme Court observed that notices under the SIR exercise in Delhi appeared to be reaching voters almost mechanically. The bench asked the Election Commission to consider introducing additional safeguards in the process.
The court also emphasised the need to clarify the basis on which voters were being identified as having logical discrepancies. The October 28 hearing is expected to focus on issues relating to the restoration of previously registered voters’ names and the criteria used to issue notices.
Names of Around 47 Lakh Voters Deleted from Delhi’s Draft Electoral Rolls
On August 31, the Election Commission published the draft electoral rolls for Delhi. According to the commission’s figures, around 47 lakh names were removed from the draft list, which had approximately 1.45 crore registered voters before the SIR exercise. The Election Commission attributed the deletions to several reasons. It stated that more than 43.32 lakh voters had either shifted residence or were found absent during verification. More than 2.82 lakh voters were reported to have died, while over 1.41 lakh voters were found registered at multiple locations.
Against this backdrop, the upcoming Supreme Court hearing assumes significance. The court will consider issues concerning the procedure for restoring the names of previously enrolled voters and the need for greater transparency in the grounds on which notices are issued during the SIR exercise.
