The Election Commission of India (ECI) has asserted before the Supreme Court that it has the legal authority to verify an individual's citizenship status during the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls in Bihar. This clarification came through a counter-affidavit filed in response to petitions challenging the ongoing SIR process.
The petitioners argued that the ECI was exceeding its constitutional limits by asking voters to prove their citizenship. In response, the ECI maintained that it is constitutionally bound to ensure that only citizens of India are enrolled as voters, in line with Article 326 of the Constitution and Sections 16 and 19 of the Representation of the People Act, 1950.
Read also: “A Cow is a Cow” – Supreme Court Rejects Plea for Use of Only Indigenous Cow Milk at Tirumala Temple
"ECI is vested with the power to scrutinize whether a proposed elector fulfils the criteria for being registered as a voter in the electoral roll, which includes, inter alia, an assessment of citizenship as per Article 326 of the Constitution of India,"
— Counter-affidavit by Deputy Election Commissioner Sanjay Kumar.
The affidavit further explains that the eligibility for inclusion in the electoral roll is directly linked to Indian citizenship, and hence, it is the Commission's duty to confirm this status.
"Under the provision of the Constitution of India and statutory provisions, the ECI is obligated to verify the eligibility of the voters... ensuring that no ineligible person is included and no eligible person is excluded from the electoral rolls."
Read also: Supreme Court Directs Isha Foundation and Nakkheeran to Approach Delhi High Court
Rejecting the argument that only the Central Government can adjudicate citizenship, the ECI referred to Section 9 of the Citizenship Act, 1955. It stated that the Central Government’s exclusive authority is limited to cases involving voluntary acquisition of foreign citizenship.
"Other aspects related to citizenship can be inquired into by other relevant authorities for their purposes, including those who are constitutionally obligated to do so, i.e., the ECI."
The Commission also stressed that various parts of the Constitution require proof of citizenship for specific constitutional roles or benefits. It argued that different authorities may examine citizenship for different legal and administrative purposes.
"The necessary documents required to establish citizenship are within the special knowledge of the individual... and not of the authorities of State."
Addressing concerns about burden of proof, the ECI clarified that under the Registration of Electors Rules, 1960, a person seeking to be listed as a voter must apply using Form 6 and prove eligibility at that stage.
On the removal of names from electoral rolls, the ECI noted that such steps are only taken after thorough inquiries by the Electoral Registration Officer (ERO) and only when there is sufficient evidence of ineligibility.
"Under the SIR exercise, the citizenship of an individual will not terminate on account of the fact that he/she is held to be ineligible for registration in the electoral rolls."
The ECI emphasized that it is not deciding citizenship but merely ensuring that non-citizens do not enter the voter list, which it described as essential for maintaining electoral integrity.
"Verifying whether an applicant or existing voter meets the citizenship condition for inclusion in the electoral roll is well within its statutory powers."
The Supreme Court had earlier commented during the July 17 hearing that determining citizenship was the Union Government’s job. The bench also suggested that the ECI consider documents like Aadhaar, Voter ID, and ration cards in the verification process.
The matter is next listed for hearing on July 28.
The ECI’s response was filed by advocates Eklavya Dwivedi, Sidhant Kumar, Prateek Kumar, and Kumar Utsav.
Case No.: W.P.(C) No. 640/2025 and connected matters
Case Title: Association for Democratic Reforms & Ors. v. Election Commission of India & connected matters