Did EC give data to show SIR was necessary and imminent, petitioners ask SC

Senior advocate Kapil Sibal asked the Supreme Court on Wednesday, January 28, 2026, whether the Election Commission of India (EC) has brought any data on record to show that a nationwide Special Intensive Revision (SIR) is necessary and imminent despite annual updates in the electoral rolls.

Mr. Sibal filed the reply submissions for the petitioners, including Opposition parties from Kerala, Tamil Nadu and West Bengal, after the poll panel completed marathon arguments in favor of SIR, which spanned several days.

Gopal Sankaranarayanan, senior advocate at NGO Association for Democratic Reforms, pointed out that ordinary people, especially the marginalized sections, use their positions in the electoral rolls to exercise basic civil rights.

“Rights that they cannot exercise unless they are citizens. The problem is obvious when you are asked for proof of proof. If you cannot produce one of the two documents, you have to live in fear of being expelled as a foreigner… God knows when that ax will fall. We have seen ICE do this in the USA. It may happen here too. It may not be this exemption, this EC or this government that we need to worry about. We are worried that this little piece of paper creates protection for us, our civil rights and our right to be a part of this country,” said Mr. Sankaranaraynan.

Mr. Sibal stated that the Commission, which is a constitutional authority, should be able to provide data based on a detailed study indicating that SIR is necessary.

Chief Justice of India Surya Kant stated that the poll body only sought documents from voters who could not link their names with their own or their parents’ names in the 2002 electoral rolls.

Mr. Sibal asked how many people could have their parents’ or even their own birth certificates. He said the citizenship of 1.82 crore people was questioned.

Mr. Sibal asked, “How many illegal immigrants were found in Bihar when all the exercises were completed?” he asked.

He asked if there was any transparency or data on the number of people added to the electoral roll.

“A process of this nature must have an application of reason that produces reasons why this has become necessary today. This reason was necessary not just for some or a constituency but for the whole nation,” Mr. Sibal said.

The Chief Justice noted that much may have changed in the voter rolls since the massive revision two decades ago.

“There would be deaths and out-migrations,” said Judge Joymalya Bagchi.

“But these updates were already being made on an annual basis. All of these are available in the 2025 voter rolls. I say, they need a wholesale SIR despite the 2025 voter rolls. How did the EC come to this decision? They need to produce data to show that despite the annual updates until 2025, they still need the SIR to be done in the middle of the election and for what purpose,” said Sibal.

He said verification of citizenship by the polling agency should be related to the reasons specified in the Citizenship Act. “The exercise of executive or administrative powers must be supported by justifications related to that power,” Mr. Sibal said.