Yogendra Yadav Supreme Court Appearance
Supreme Court to Hear Challenge to Assam’s Electoral Roll Revision Process
Table of Contents
new Delhi: Teh Supreme Court is set to hear a crucial petition challenging the ongoing process of revising electoral rolls in Assam, often referred to as the Summary Revision of Electoral Rolls (SREP). The petitioner, represented by senior advocate Kapil Sibal and advocate Prashant Bhushan, argues that the process, notably the exclusion of approximately 40 lakh individuals from the draft rolls, is flawed and risks disenfranchising a meaningful portion of the population.
Concerns Over Flawed Enumeration and Citizenship Presumption
The core of the challenge lies in the methodology employed by the Election Commission of India (ECI) during the enumeration process. The petitioner contends that the ECI’s reliance on a limited set of documents and a perhaps rushed enumeration exercise, hampered by infrastructure and personnel constraints, could lead to the erroneous exclusion of eligible voters.A rejoinder filed by advocate gautam Bhatia,on behalf of petitioner Dr. Samudra Gupta,highlights concerns that the ECI’s approach to identifying “doubtful voters” and those whose citizenship is questioned is based on broad generalizations.This, the rejoinder argues, could lead to the mass disenfranchisement of individuals, especially given the limitations of the enumeration process.The rejoinder specifically counters the ECI’s submissions that the SIR exercise aligns with the Portrayal of the People’s Act, 1950, and the Registration of Electors Rule, 1960.It emphasizes the Supreme Court’s own precedent in Lal Babu Hussein v. Electoral Registration officer (1995), which presumes citizenship for individuals whose names are already on the electoral rolls.
Presumption of citizenship for Unenumerated Individuals
A key point raised in the rejoinder is the treatment of the approximately 40 lakh individuals who have yet to submit their enumeration forms. The petitioner urges that their citizenship should be presumed,and they should not be automatically deleted from the electoral rolls. This stance is rooted in the principle that exclusion should not be the default for those whose status is yet to be definitively determined through a fair process.
Exclusion from Draft Roll Treated as New Voter Registration
The rejoinder further illuminates a critical aspect of the ECI’s process: individuals whose names are excluded from the draft roll are effectively treated as new applicants for voter registration. While the ECI suggests that missing names can be rectified during the claims and objections phase,the petitioner points out that this requires submitting a self-declaration along with Form 6,the standard form for new voter registrations.This, the rejoinder argues, “effectively erases their status as registered electors and subjects them to the full burden of re-establishing their eligibility through a fresh and onerous verification process.” This means that even individuals with a history of voting and prior inclusion on the voter list must undergo a new, rigorous verification, potentially leading to their disenfranchisement if they fail to meet the stringent requirements of a fresh submission.
The Supreme Court bench, comprising Justice Surya Kant and Justice Joymalya Bagchi, is scheduled to hear the matter on July 28. the rejoinder has been drawn by Advocates Natasha Maheshwari and Harshit Anand, and filed through advocate Yash S Vijay.
Case Details: Association for Democratic Reforms and Ors. v. Election Commission of India and connected matters | W.P.(C) No. 640/2025 and connected matters.