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...