Revision of Electoral Rolls in Bihar | Day 6: Supreme Court directs political parties to assist excluded voters in filing claims

Election Commission: Political parties did not participate

Senior Advocate Rakesh Dwivedi, for the Election Commission of India (ECI), submitted that the Commission had complied “in letter and spirit” with the Court’s direction to publish the list of 65 lakh voters that were excluded from the draft electoral rolls. The list was to be released online and displayed at Panchayat and Block offices, with reasons explaining why a voter was not included. Dwivedi informed the Bench that the lists were now available even at polling stations. Further, advertisements and social media notices had been issued to inform excluded voters that they could digitally file claims and objections using their Aadhaar.

Dwivedi pointed out that the contribution of the 1.6 lakh BLAs was negligible. “If one BLA meets even ten people a day, sixteen lakh voters can be reached daily,” he said. He clarified that individual voters could also file claims directly, and BLAs were authorised to submit ten forms per day.

He argued that the petitioners had raised exaggerated concerns, stating, “Many bogus stories are being circulated. Please wait and repose some trust in the EC”. He submitted that the Chief Election Commissioner had held a press conference inviting organisations to point out errors.

Petitioners seek extension of timeline for filing objections

Advocate Prashant Bhushan, for Association for Democratic Reforms, submitted that the ECI had broadly complied with the Court’s directions. However, excluded voters were being asked to file claims only in Form 6, a form intended for fresh inclusion in the rolls rather than correction. According to him, the form required only Aadhaar and a declaration, but officials were demanding additional documents. He urged the Court to clarify that Aadhaar alone would suffice. This reiterated arguments raised earlier, when Senior Advocates A.M. Singhvi and Gopal Sankaranarayanan argued that Aadhaar, with its widest coverage, ought to be accepted as a standalone document in the revision exercise.Today, Sankaranarayanan submitted that difficulties would intensify when the final rolls were published.

Senior Advocate Vrinda Grover, for one of the petitioners, submitted that the issue of documents affected the entire electorate and extended beyond the sixty-five lakh excluded names. She said citizens in Bihar were facing floods, low digital literacy and confusion caused by the ECI itself. “The voter should not suffer. The voter cannot be made dependent on political parties,” she said. She called for a press release by the ECI clarifying document requirements and an extension of the timeline to ensure fairness.

Advocate Nizam Pasha, appearing for the All India Majlis-e-Ittehad-ul-Muslimeen (AIMIM), produced screenshots to show that the ECI website had no record of supporting documents when an Electors Photo Identity Card number was entered. Without such a record, he argued, the Commission could later deny that voters had filed proof.

Appearing for the Rashtriya Janata Dal, Advocate Fauzia Shakil submitted that deleted lists were only placed at Panchayat offices on 18 August, leaving electors with little time to respond. She requested that the Court extend the filing deadline by two weeks for the sixty-five lakh excluded voters.

Bench: Political parties must assist voters

The Bench questioned the lack of participation from political parties. Justice Kant noted that out of 12 recognised parties, only three had appeared before the Court. “After appointing BLAs, what are they doing?” he asked.

On the question of documents, the Bench pressed the ECI to clarify that Aadhaar alone would suffice. Justice Kant stated, “Let them submit forms with Aadhaar and whatever documents they have. Applications must be filed immediately.” He said that the lack of other documents should not prevent the claim from being considered. Justice Bagchi added that ECI should now accept the Aadhaar to avoid unnecessary exclusion.

The Court noted that the exercise must be voter-friendly and that responsibility could not be shifted to citizens alone.

Directions of the Bench

Following the hearing, the Bench recorded the following directions:

1. Mode of filing: Claims and objections could be submitted either online or in physical form. Physical submission was not mandatory.
2. Document requirement: Aadhaar alone, or any one of the eleven prescribed documents, was sufficient for filing claims. Applications were not to be rejected for want of additional documents.
3. Acknowledgement receipts: Booth-level officers were directed to issue acknowledgement receipts for all physical forms. The ECI may also consider placing such receipts on its website.
4. Role of political parties: All twelve recognised political parties in Bihar were impleaded. The Chief Electoral Officer was directed to issue notice to their presidents or office-bearers, who were required to file status reports. The Bench further directed that BLAs of these parties must actively assist the approximately sixty-five lakh voters excluded from the draft rolls, other than those who are deceased or have voluntarily migrated, in submitting objections before the cut-off date of 1 September 2025.

The matter will be listed on 8 September, for review of compliance and for further directions, if necessary.