Supreme Court Upholds Election Commission's Authority To Conduct SIR Exercise

New Delhi:  The Supreme Court on Wednesday has upheld the constitutional legality of the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of the electoral rolls done by the Election Commission of India and stated that the process "breathes life" into the provisions of the Representation of the People Act.

What did the Supreme Court say about the SIR?

The bench comprising of Chief Justice Surya Kant and Justice Joymalya Bagchi on Wednesday said that conducting SIR is the Election Commission's right and helps maintain accurate and transparent voter lists. 

The court stated that the Election Commission conducted SIR in accordance with the law and there were no flaws in the process. The EC did not misuse its powers.

"We are equally satisfied that the object sought to be achieved by the SIR bears a direct nexus to the constitutional goal of free and fair elections," said the court. 

"The exercise cannot be struck down merely because Procedure is different from ordinary electoral rolls."

What did Top Court say about Election Commission?

The Supreme Court said that under the constitutional system and the Representation of the People Act, the Election Commission has the right to conduct a special in-depth revision of the voters' list.

"In the present case, the procedural safeguards introduced both by the Commission and pursuant to the directions issued by this Court from time to time have sought to strike a balance between the need for electoral integrity and the protection of constitutional rights," the court noted.

"The process, as ultimately unfolded, provided multiple avenues for participation, correction and redress," the order added.

SIR does not determine citizenship

According to the Supreme Court, the Election Commission has the authority to revise and amend voter lists under Section 16 of the Representation of the People Act, 1950. 

The Supreme Court stated that after a detailed analysis of the case, it is clear that the purpose of the SIR is legitimate and constitutionally justified. According to the court, the primary objective of this process is to ensure the accuracy, completeness, and reliability of voter lists.