Supreme Court Seeks ECI Response On Delhi SIR Notices, Suggests More Help For Voters
Summarized by AI; it may make mistakes. Check important info
Summarized by AI; it may make mistakes. Check important info
The Supreme Court on Tuesday sought the Election Commission of India's response to a petition challenging the manner in which the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls is being conducted in Delhi, particularly the issuance of notices to voters flagged under the “logical discrepancy” category.
A bench comprising Chief Justice of India Surya Kant and Justices Joymalya Bagchi and V. Mohana asked the poll panel to indicate the immediate steps being taken to address the concerns. The matter has been posted for further hearing after two weeks.
SC Seeks Safeguards Before Issuing Notices
During the hearing, Justice Bagchi observed that some notices appeared to have been issued without adequate scrutiny and asked the ECI to examine whether additional safeguards were required.
The court indicated that some notices could have been generated mechanically and suggested that the poll panel consider additional filters before they are issued.
The petition particularly challenges the basis on which voters are categorised under “logical discrepancy” and seeks greater clarity on the criteria used for identifying such cases.
Court Suggests Greater BLO Assistance
The Supreme Court also stressed the need for Booth Level Officers (BLOs) to assist voters who receive SIR notices.
The bench suggested that field-level election officials should be sensitised to interact more closely with affected electors. It also suggested that the ECI prepare frequently asked questions (FAQs) explaining the SIR process and the steps voters need to follow after receiving a notice.
Petitioners Raise Concerns Over 33 Lakh Notices
Appearing for the petitioners, advocate Prashant Bhushan raised concerns over the large number of notices issued to electors, arguing that they did not adequately explain the reasons for the notices or the steps voters were required to take.
According to the figures placed before the court, more than 47 lakh names were excluded from the draft electoral roll published on August 31, while more than 33 lakh electors were identified for notices over discrepancies in their enumeration forms.
The petition seeks disclosure of the criteria used to identify voters under the “logical discrepancy” category.
ECI Says Notices Mention Reasons
Appearing for the ECI, senior advocate Dama Seshadri Naidu termed the petition premature and told the bench that the poll panel was taking steps to address the concerns.
The ECI submitted that the reason for issuing a notice was mentioned in each notice. It also assured the court that no voter would be deleted from the electoral roll without being given an opportunity of hearing.
The poll panel further said it had increased the number of personnel to deal with the large volume of notices. The ECI also pointed out that the notices contain details of the concerned BLO whom voters can approach for assistance.
ECI Indicates Deadline Can Be Extended
The bench was informed that there was sufficient time to address any shortcomings in the Delhi SIR exercise as the national capital is not scheduled to go to the polls immediately.
The ECI also indicated that the deadline for completing the process could be extended if necessary.
The claims and objections process is currently underway, with the final electoral roll scheduled to be published on November 4.
Delhi CEO Clarifies SIR Notice Does Not Mean Deletion
The Delhi Chief Electoral Officer had on Monday clarified that receiving an SIR notice does not mean that an elector's name will be deleted from the final electoral roll.
According to the CEO's office, notices are being generated for two categories of voters whose names appear in the draft roll — those who could not be linked with the electoral roll of the last intensive revision and those identified as having logical discrepancies in such linking.
The CEO's office has also stated that no name can be deleted without giving the concerned elector an opportunity to be heard and passing a proper speaking and appealable order.
Eligible persons whose names are not included in the draft roll can file Form 6 with supporting documents during the claims and objections period. Special camps have also been proposed to assist voters with the process.
