9. Judicial Oversight of Special Intensive Revision (SIR): Balancing Efficiency and Constitutional Rights

The recent hearings in the Supreme Court concerning the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls have brought the spotlight onto the delicate balance between the Election Commission’s administrative powers and the fundamental rights of citizens. The unprecedented appearance of a sitting Chief Minister before the Apex Court underscores the high political and constitutional stakes involved in the nationwide revision exercise. Core Summary of the Development • Unprecedented Judicial Intervention: In February 2026, West Bengal CM Mamata Banerjee personally argued before the Supreme Court, alleging procedural infirmities in the SIR that were causing mass hardship and potential disenfranchisement. • Supreme Court Directions: On February 9, 2026, a Bench led by CJI Surya Kant extended the SIR deadline for West Bengal by one week and clarified that only Electoral Registration Officers (EROs) hold final adjudicatory power, effectively limiting the role of ECI-appointed micro-observers. • The \'Fait Accompli\' Concern: Legal experts and petitioners have criticized the Court for acting as an \'administrator\' (e.g., deciding which IDs to accept) rather than a \'constitutional court,\' allowing the SIR process to proceed as a fait accompli before deciding its core constitutionality. • Burden of Proof Shift: A major point of contention is whether the SIR inverts the state-citizen relationship by placing the burden on the entire population to \'prove\' their citizenship and right to vote from scratch, without individual suspicion. • Disproportionate Impact: Arguments presented in court highlight that stringent documentation requirements (like parent\'s legacy data) disproportionately affect the marginalized and vulnerable, potentially violating Article 14 (Right to Equality). • Misuse of Form 7: Widespread reports have surfaced regarding the misuse of Form 7 (used to object to a person\'s inclusion in the roll) for en masse deletions, raising concerns about the integrity of the revision process. Key Definitions• Special Intensive Revision (SIR): A comprehensive, door-to-door verification drive by the Election Commission of India (ECI) to update electoral rolls, typically involving fresh enumeration rather than simple summary updates. • Fait Accompli: A thing that has already happened or been decided before those affected hear about it, leaving them with no option but to accept it. • Form 7: An application for objecting to the inclusion of a name in the electoral roll or seeking the deletion of an existing name. Constitutional & Legal Provisions • Article 324: Vests the superintendence, direction, and control of the preparation of electoral rolls in the Election Commission of India. • Article 326: Grants the Right to Vote based on adult suffrage to every citizen of India who is 18 years of age and not otherwise disqualified. • Section 21(3), Representation of the People Act, 1950: Empowers the ECI to direct a \'special revision\' of the electoral roll for any constituency for reasons to be recorded in writing. • Lal Babu Hussein vs. ERO (1995): A landmark SC judgment which held that large-scale removal of names based on suspicion of non-citizenship is unconstitutional; any deletion must follow the principles of natural justice, including individual notice and disclosure of reasons. Additional Key Points • Institutional Role: The debate highlights a \'judicial drift\' where the Court avoids determining the \'vires\' (legal power) of the ECI\'s actions, focusing instead on procedural tweaks, which critics argue validates the exercise by default. • Administrative vs. Constitutional: While the ECI claims the SIR is for \'cleansing\' rolls of duplicates and ghost voters, petitioners argue it has morphed into a \'citizenship determining exercise\' without legislative backing. • State vs. Individual: The SIR\'s \'dragnet\' approach—treating the entire population as suspects—is seen as a departure from the 1995 precedent where suspicion had to be individualized. Conclusion The SIR controversy represents a pivotal moment in India\'s democratic journey, where the quest for \'perfect\' electoral rolls clashes with the \'dignity and participatory rights\' of the individual. As the Supreme Court continues to navigate these hearings, its challenge lies in ensuring that administrative efficiency does not override constitutional safeguards. A final determination on whether the ECI can use a targeted power for massscale revisions will define the future of the state-citizen relationship in India. UPSC Relevance • GS Paper II: Election Commission of India (powers and functions); Salient features of the Representation of People Act; Structure, organization, and functioning of the Judiciary. • GS Paper IV (Ethics): Ethical issues in governance; Rights vs. Administrative efficiency. • Mains Perspective: Evaluate the impact of \'judicial drift\' on the doctrine of checks and balances. Discuss the tension between Article 324 and the fundamental right to vote under Article 326.