Supreme Court Tells Election Commission: Citizenship Determination is not Your Job, Home Ministry's Duty

The Supreme Court questioned the Election Commission's right to prove citizenship during the special revision of the Bihar voter list and asserted that the right lies with the Home Ministry.

On July 11, 2025, the Supreme Court of India strongly objected to the Election Commission of India's (ECI) move to conduct a Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of the Bihar Voter List a few months ahead of the state elections.

The court was hearing a batch of petitions, including petition number 640/2025 filed by Association for Democratic Reforms and others, challenging the Election Commission's June 24 notification issued under Section 21(3) of the Representation of the People Act, 1950.

A bench of Justices Sudhanshu Dhulia and Joymalya Bagchi strongly criticised the Election Commission for seeking proof of citizenship from voters, especially at short notice.

"The onus is not on me to prove citizenship,"—Senior advocate Kapil Sibal, appearing for RJD MP Manoj Jha

Sibal pointed out that the Election Commission was unfairly excluding common documents like Aadhaar, MNREGA job card, EPIC card and ration card, on which many people depend. Justice Bagchi said even the documents listed by the Election Commission do not prove citizenship individually.

“These other documents also do not prove citizenship by themselves.”— Justice Joymalya Bagchi

When senior advocate Rakesh Dwivedi, counsel for the Election Commission, claimed that Aadhaar could only be used for identification, not citizenship, Justice Bagchi responded:

“This (citizenship determination) is a separate issue and the prerogative of the Ministry of Home Affairs.”

The court questioned the timing of the amendment process just before the November elections and asked whether it would have an undue impact on the voter’s right to vote.

“Your decision to disenfranchise a person who is already on the voters’ list will force him to appeal and go through this complex process, thereby depriving him of the right to vote in the forthcoming election.”— Justice Dhulia

Justice Dhulia also said:

“They are saying that you are suddenly asking people for documents that they do not have.”

Senior advocate Abhishek Manu Singhvi criticised linking such a large verification exercise to the elections.

“Such a huge exercise should be separated from the impending election.”

Justice Bagchi questioned the feasibility of such a task under the limited time frame, citing the huge population, and said:

“Even a census takes a year… why only 30 days?”

Dwivedi defended the commission, saying the process had been carried out legally and more than 60% of the forms—nearly five crore—had already been submitted. He stressed that the commission had no intention of excluding any legitimate voter.

“The Election Commission is a constitutional body dealing directly with the voter… it cannot and does not intend to exclude anyone from the voters’ list unless it is compelled by law to do so.”—Rakesh Dwivedi, for the EC

The court, however, was not fully convinced.

“We have serious doubts about adhering to this deadline. Remember, you have to follow the process. This is not practical.”— Justice Dhulia

As the Supreme Court directed the Election Commission to also accept Aadhaar card, voter ID card and ration card as valid documents in the SIR process.

The case will be heard again on July 28, 2025.

Case No. – W.P.(C) No. 640/2025 and connected matters

Case Title – Association for Democratic Reforms and Ors. v. Election Commission of India and connected matters

Related: