New Delhi. The Supreme Court on Thursday reserved its verdict on petitions challenging the process of Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of voter lists in Bihar. These petitions also include the petition filed by the non-governmental organization (NGO) Association for Democratic Reforms.

It has been claimed in these petitions that the Election Commission does not have the powers to implement SIR on such a large scale under Article 326 of the Constitution, the Representation of the People Act-1950 and the rules made thereunder. The top court is investigating the claims made in these petitions.

The SIR process was conducted in the first phase in Bihar. The second phase of the process of SIR of voter list is being conducted in nine states including Chhattisgarh, Goa, Gujarat, Kerala, Madhya Pradesh, Rajasthan, Tamil Nadu, Uttar Pradesh and West Bengal besides three union territories of the country including Andaman and Nicobar, Lakshadweep and Puducherry.

A separate ‘special revision’ of voter lists is underway in Assam. A bench of Chief Justice Surya Kant and Justice Joymalya Bagchi concluded the hearing after hearing arguments from several lawyers, including senior advocates Kapil Sibal, Abhishek Singhvi, Prashant Bhushan and Gopal Shankaranarayan. Senior advocates Rakesh Dwivedi and Maninder Singh appeared on behalf of the Election Commission in this matter. The bench reserved the verdict after hearing the counter arguments presented by the petitioners.

The court had begun final arguments in the case on August 12 last year, in which it had said that inclusion or deletion of names in the voter list falls within the constitutional jurisdiction of the Election Commission of India (ECI). The Election Commission has released the names of 65 lakh people in Bihar who were removed from the draft voter list published under the SIR process.

The Election Commission has defended the SIR process, saying Aadhaar and voter ID cards cannot be treated as conclusive proof of citizenship. The petitioners have alleged that the revision of the voter list was an ‘NRC-like process’ in which the Election Commission is verifying citizenship, while this power is vested with the Central Government.

With regard to the admissibility of Aadhaar card as a proof, the apex court clearly stated that the possibility of forgery cannot be a ground to reject the 12-digit biometric identifier. Advocate Singhvi, appearing for one of the petitioners, accused the Election Commission of excluding an estimated five crore people in the SIR.

Advocate Prashant Bhushan, appearing for ADR, questioned the timeline for completing the process. Political activist Yogendra Yadav questioned the figures given by the Election Commission, saying that the total adult population of voters in Bihar was 8.18 crore instead of 7.9 crore and the purpose of the SIR process was actually to remove voters from the list.