LawLoveLegal

The Supreme Court’s latest observations during the petitions challenging the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls in Bihar raise important constitutional and statutory questions. The core issue is whether the Election Commission of India (ECI) can inquire into "doubtful citizenship" while revising electoral rolls, without assuming the authority to declare someone a citizen or non-citizen. Issue 1: Court Clarifies ECI Is Not Claiming Power to Determine Citizenship The Supreme Court clarified that the ECI has not claimed any constitutional authority to decide citizenship. The bench noted: ECI’s question is not about declaring someone a citizen or non-citizen, but about whether it can conduct inquisitorial inquiries into doubtful entries during voter roll revision. The bench of CJI Surya Kant and Justice Joymalya Bagchi asked: If an electoral roll has doubtful inclusions, would it not fall within ECI’s constitutional mandate to investigate? This sets th...

The political developments in Kerala have taken a significant constitutional turn as the State government, led by Chief Minister Pinarayi Vijayan , decided to legally challenge the Election Commission of India’s (ECI) decision to implement the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls. The move, endorsed by all major political parties except the BJP, raises questions about the constitutional validity, procedural fairness, and democratic implications of the ECI’s decision. Background of the Dispute At a high-level all-party meeting in Thiruvananthapuram , the Kerala government announced its decision to seek legal recourse against the SIR exercise, citing that the ECI’s move to revise voter rolls based on the 2002 electoral list was “unscientific” and “ill-intentioned.” The Chief Minister’s Office (CMO) stated that with the upcoming local body elections scheduled for late 2025, revising the voter rolls in such a hurried and retrospective manner could disrupt the elec...

ECI Defends Its Constitutional Authority The Election Commission of India (ECI) has categorically told the Supreme Court that courts cannot mandate fixed timelines for special intensive revisions (SIR) of electoral rolls. In an affidavit filed on Friday, the ECI asserted that such decisions lie solely within its constitutional and statutory authority , as provided under Article 324 of the Constitution , the Representation of the People Act, 1950 , and the Registration of Electors Rules, 1960 . The Commission emphasized that it enjoys complete discretion over the preparation and revision of rolls and warned that any judicial interference in fixing mandatory timelines would amount to encroachment upon its plenary powers . PIL Seeks Nationwide Special Electoral Roll Revisions The affidavit was filed in response to a public interest litigation (PIL) by advocate Ashwini Kumar Upadhyay . His petition demanded mandatory nationwide special intensive revisions , especially before parl...

Introduction The Constitution (One Hundred and Thirtieth Amendment) Bill, 2025, introduced in the Lok Sabha (Bill No. 111 of 2025), seeks to address a significant constitutional vacuum. At present, there is no explicit provision in the Indian Constitution for the removal of a Prime Minister, Chief Minister, or Minister who is arrested and detained in custody on serious criminal charges. This Bill aims to set a framework to safeguard constitutional morality, public trust, and good governance . Key Amendments Proposed 1. Amendment to Article 75 (Union Ministers) A Union Minister, including the Prime Minister, who is arrested and detained for 30 consecutive days on charges punishable with imprisonment of five years or more , shall be removed from office . The President shall act on the advice of the Prime Minister. If the Prime Minister himself is in custody, he must resign within 31 days . If not, he will automatically cease to hold office. 2. Amendment to Article 164...

Rahul Gandhi Accuses, But Remains Silent? ECI Awaits a Response In a rare and publicly assertive move, the Election Commission of India (ECI) has called out Leader of the Opposition Rahul Gandhi for failing to respond to an official communication dated June 12, 2025 , regarding his allegations of “election rigging” in the Maharashtra Assembly Elections 2024 . Rahul Gandhi had published a sharply worded article in the Indian Express on June 7 , claiming the 2024 Maharashtra election was a “blueprint for rigging democracy” , and that the same tactics could be deployed in upcoming Bihar Assembly polls . However, nearly two months since the ECI’s invitation to discuss the matter in person , there has been no formal reply from the Congress leader. What Did the ECI’s June 12 Letter Say? In its letter, the Commission stated: “We presume that any issue regarding conduct of elections would have already been raised through election petitions filed in the competent court of law by the...

Plea in Supreme Court Seeks Re-election in 20 Vidhan Sabha Seats in Haryana Due to EVM Discrepancies Introduction A petition has been filed in the Supreme Court of India  demanding re-election in 20 assembly constituencies in Haryana . The petition alleges suspicious election results and discrepancies in the functioning of Electronic Voting Machines (EVMs) used during the state legislative assembly elections in 2024. The plea, filed by petitioners Priya Mishra  and Vikas Bansal , claims that irregularities in EVM battery levels and functioning compromised the integrity of the election process, calling for a fresh round of voting in the affected constituencies. Details of the Petition The petition, filed through advocate Narendra Mishra , calls for re-elections in the specified constituencies, citing inconsistencies in EVM operations. It alleges that certain EVMs used during the counting of votes on October 8, 2024 , were operating at varying battery levels, ranging from 99% t...