Election Commission’s power to control elections is no carte blanche to rule on citizenship, petitioners assert
Prashant Bhushan and Neha Rathi, advocates of NGO Democratic Reforms Association, argued that the Election Commission had arbitrarily assumed the power to “determine citizenship”. File | Photo Credit: The Hindu
The Supreme Court on Thursday, January 29, 2026, reserved for decision a batch of petitions challenging the constitutionality of the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) exercise that started in the State of Bihar.
Appearing before Chief Justice of India Surya Kant and Justice Joymalya Bagchi, lawyers for Prashant Bhushan and Neha Rathi, working on behalf of the Association for Democratic Reforms, argued that the Election Commission had arbitrarily assumed powers to “determine citizenship” and overridden limitations expressly provided for in parliamentary acts, rules and its own guidelines, without providing “any good reason”.
“The EC says that the power to control and conduct elections under Article 324 is unlimited power, not subject to any law, rule or guideline. The EC says we can do whatever we want or in the way we want. But no authority can act arbitrarily or without good reason,” Mr. Bhushan said.
critical verdict
The Supreme Court’s decision on the constitutionality of the BIhar SIR will determine whether it will be applicable to other States.
During the hearing, Mr. Bhushan compared the 2025 SIR with the conduct of the 2003 SIR, in which ECI officials took time to conduct door-to-door surveys among voters. He said the 2025 SIR was riddled with structural problems, including that the onus was primarily on voters to prove eligibility for the electoral roll.
He said the SIR had seen a huge decline in the number of voters, mostly women and migrant workers who were unable to fill out census forms or submit documents for verification.
Decision about citizenship
“The Electoral Registration Officer (ERO) on the ground requires either a passport or a birth certificate to determine citizenship. What about those who have neither? And who gave the ERO the authority to determine citizenship?” Mr. Bhushan asked.
He submitted that Form 6 of the Electoral Registration Rules, 1960, required the assertion of citizenship or self-declaration.
“ERO is not a court. If someone claims that I am not a citizen, I have the right to cross-examine that person or authority in court,” Mr. Bhushan said.
Vrinda Grover, counsel for the petitioners, also in the Bihar SIR, argued that the 2025 SIR procedure was in fact a “legal amendment disguised as a notification”.
“Please let us know where they come from. [ECI] Do you have the strength?” Miss Grover asked.
It was published – 29 January 2026 22:26 IST
