Focus on ‘en masse inclusion, not exclusion’ in voter list update, Supreme Court tells ECI

On Monday, the Supreme Court asked the Indian Election Commission (ECI) to focus on the “mass includes” instead of “collective exclusion” at the ongoing special intensive revision of the election rolls in Bihar. The upper court asked the questionnaire to rethink, including AADHAAR and Election Photo Identity Card (EPIC), and can be accepted as acceptable documents in the list of acceptable documents to prove the identity of voters in the revision of the election rolls.

However, a section of the chapter consisting of Justices Syria Kant and Joymalya Bagchi refused to prevent ECI from publishing draft election rolls for Bihar on August 1, according to ECI’s program for Sir.

Speaking for the bench, Justice Kant said orally “this is just a draft exercise”. In the future, he added, “It does not eliminate our strength,” he added to relieve the whole roll. Justice Kant, “Trust us … Nothing is wrong, we will break everything,” Justice Kant added, “comment” should be decided, he said.
Speaking about the exclusion of Aadhaar and Epic, the senior SC judge verbally said, “This is a fake of any document in this world. Tomorrow, you can see that not only Aadhaar, but also ten (list of acceptable documents), and other documents may be fake. This is a separate issue.

Justice Bagchi, who questioned the ECI lawyer about the exclusion of AADHAAR and voter cards, said, “You say that none of the documents are not certain according to the Erıc notification … Suppose someone uploading the form with Aadhaar, why will you not include it in the draft?” ECI lawyer claimed that there were big -scale problems with ration cards. He also said that the epics could not be certain. However, the counter questioned the stand of the survey body.

SC postponed the issue due to the lack of time. The upper court asked the consultants to give the petition holders and ECI for their applications for the final trial. The upper court referring to ECI said that a “constitutional organ could not stop making a” democratic process “and would not predict ECI as the second.