October 07, 2026 03:50 pm (IST)
Follow us:
facebook-white sharing button
twitter-white sharing button
instagram-white sharing button
youtube-white sharing button
RBI shocks borrowers with first repo rate hike since 2023; rates raised to 5.50% | ‘Completely false’: Virat Kohli reacts to ₹5 crore claim over Premanand Maharaj visit | We’re watching it very closely: US urges Russia to share more information on plague situation | This isn’t about schools: Trump blames ‘mass migration’ and Islam for violent protests across France | ‘Crash axe’ blow fractured Smit Machchhar’s skull: Shocking details emerge from flydubai cockpit horror | ‘Vote thief’ Gyanesh Kumar: Rahul Gandhi climbs barricade, waves Tricolour during explosive INDIA bloc protest | ‘Crash axe’ blow fractured Smit Machchhar’s skull: Shocking details emerge from flydubai cockpit horror | ‘He should not have been flying’: JD Vance on Flydubai co-pilot | Israel was ready to shoot down Flydubai jet if it kept flying towards Tel Aviv: Reports | 'If law wasn't followed, we can undo it': Supreme Court's big warning on SIR process amid Gyanesh Kumar row
Supreme Court says petitioners should submit 100-200 examples of wrongful voter deletions in Bihar. Photo: Wikimedia Commons.

Supreme Court seeks proof of wrongful voter deletions in Bihar; asks petitioners for 100–200 examples

| @indiablooms | Oct 07, 2025, at 11:26 pm

The Supreme Court on Tuesday said it requires greater clarity on the alleged wrongful deletion of names from the final electoral roll in Bihar, which was published by the Election Commission of India (ECI) after the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) exercise.

A bench comprising Justice Surya Kant and Justice Joymalya Bagchi asked petitioners, including the Association of Democratic Reforms (ADR) and several political parties, to submit affidavits with examples of at least 100–200 voters who were allegedly removed unfairly from the voter list.

“We cannot decide this issue in the dark,” Justice Surya Kant said, noting that individual proof of wrongful deletion would help the court determine whether the process violated any laws or electoral norms.

During the hearing, Justice Bagchi pointed to discrepancies between the draft list published on August 30 and the final voter list, saying there was confusion about the identities of added and deleted voters.

“There seems to be an increase in the number of voters in the final list, but we need to know- are these re-additions of deleted names or new voters altogether?” Justice Bagchi asked.

The Election Commission, represented by Senior Advocate Rakesh Dwivedi, said most of the additions were new voters, not reinstated ones.

However, the bench sought transparency from the poll body, observing that it was important to clarify the nature of additions and deletions to maintain public confidence in the electoral process.

“You have draft and final lists. Omission is clear from the names. Just cull that out and give us the information,” Justice Bagchi said, adding that the court’s intervention should not be viewed as interference but as a step to aid the electoral process.

Petitioners, led by Advocate Prashant Bhushan for ADR, argued that ECI’s own rules require publication of deletion data and reasons on its website, but no such information was made public.

“They have violated their own guidelines and manual,” Bhushan said, adding that mass exclusions appeared to affect women, poor voters, and minority communities.

In response, the ECI urged the court to direct petitioners to file formal affidavits to substantiate their claims.

Advocate Nizam Pasha told the court that many voters whose names had been deleted were still awaiting official orders from the EC, preventing them from filing appeals.

Senior Advocate Abhishek Manu Singhvi added that around 3.66 lakh voters had their names removed without receiving any prior notice or reason, effectively denying them the right to appeal.

Justice Surya Kant emphasized that each individual has a right to appeal and that the court could only act if it had specific data on wrongful deletions.

“We want to know the people who have been deleted from voter lists and not filing appeal,” he said, adding that the court’s role was limited to cases of actual wrongful deletion, not general allegations.

He further noted that there were also instances of illegal immigrants whose names were lawfully removed, cautioning that the issue must be handled with care and factual precision.

The bench concluded by directing petitioners to submit affidavits with examples of 100–200 individuals who claim their names were deleted without due process, so that the Election Commission could verify the claims and the court could proceed with clarity.

Support Our Journalism

We cannot do without you.. your contribution supports unbiased journalism

IBNS is not driven by any ism- not wokeism, not racism, not skewed secularism, not hyper right-wing or left liberal ideals, nor by any hardline religious beliefs or hyper nationalism. We want to serve you good old objective news, as they are. We do not judge or preach. We let people decide for themselves. We only try to present factual and well-sourced news.

Support objective journalism for a small contribution.