Supreme Court Justice critiques mass voter exclusion in SIR exercise as unconstitutional

Hindustan Times - India · 5 Oct 2026 · 2 min read
Prelims · Polity Mains · GS2 Polity and constitution High relevance

Justice Ujjal Bhuyan condemned mass disenfranchisement through Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls as unconstitutional, emphasizing the fundamental link between citizenship and voting rights under Articles 325-326.

Key points

Justice Ujjal Bhuyan termed mass disenfranchisement 'intrinsically arbitrary', warning it creates unconstitutional 'second-class citizens' by violating the universal adult suffrage principle enshrined in Articles 325-326.

Special Intensive Revision (SIR) faces legal challenges with 47.56 lakh names excluded in Delhi and 27.16 lakh deletions in West Bengal, raising concerns about mechanical issuance of verification notices and backlog of 37 lakh pending appeals.

Constitutional basis: Justice Bhuyan cited Articles 325 (single electoral roll without religious/caste discrimination) and 326 (adult suffrage) as foundational to India's democratic structure, rejecting any administrative override of these guarantees.

Judicial precedent: Referenced PUCL v. Union of India and Anoop Baranwal cases where SC recognized voting as a constitutional right integral to free and fair elections, despite not being a fundamental right.

Historical context: Highlighted Constituent Assembly's deliberate choice for universal franchise despite 1947 challenges, calling it a transformative tool against caste/economic inequalities.

[GS2-Governance] The SIR controversy exposes institutional challenges in electoral roll management, testing ECI's autonomy and procedural fairness under the Representation of the People Act, 1950.

[GS1-Society] Mass exclusions disproportionately affect marginalized groups, reviving Ambedkar's warning about political equality coexisting with social inequality - a core GS1 social justice theme.

Current status: Supreme Court is monitoring SIR with CJI-led bench seeking ECI's response on deletion criteria ('logical discrepancies') and proposing to increase appellate tribunals from 19 to 42.

Way Forward: Mandate biometric-aided verification for deletions, establish independent audit mechanisms for electoral rolls, and amend RPA 1950 to include time-bound disposal of voter inclusion appeals.

Key terms

Article 326

Grants universal adult suffrage for Lok Sabha and state assembly elections, subject only to constitutionally recognized disqualifications. Crucial for understanding the constitutional basis of India's electoral democracy and limitations on legislative/executive power to restrict voting rights.

Special Intensive Revision (SIR)

ECI's periodic electoral roll purification drive to remove duplicate/ineligible voters. Recent controversy highlights governance challenges in balancing electoral integrity with citizen rights under Representation of the People Act, 1950 - a recurring UPSC topic.

PUCL v. Union of India (2013)

Landmark SC judgment that recognized voter's right to reject (NOTA) and affirmed voting as a constitutional right. Important precedent for understanding judicial interpretation of electoral rights beyond statutory provisions, relevant for GS2 Polity.

Article 325

Constitutional provision mandating a single electoral roll per constituency, prohibiting exclusions based solely on religion, race, caste or sex. UPSC relevance lies in its role as a safeguard against discriminatory electoral practices and its connection to equality principles under Articles 14-16.