The BRICS TimesSC was hearing pleas over the Bihar Special Intensive Revision exercise, under which the EC is revising the electoral rolls in the poll-bound state and has asked for 11 documents.
The Supreme Court on Monday directed that Aadhaar must be treated as the twelfth valid identity document for inclusion in Bihar’s electoral rolls during the ongoing special intensive revision (SIR). The order came after complaints that election officials were refusing to recognise Aadhaar despite earlier judicial directions.
A bench of justices Surya Kant and Joymalya Bagchi rejected the Election Commission of India’s hesitation to formally add Aadhaar to its list of accepted identity proofs. The court underlined that although Aadhaar cannot establish citizenship, it remains a valid indicator of identity and residence for the purpose of voter registration.
“The Aadhaar card shall be treated as the 12th document by the ECI. However, it is open for the authorities to examine the validity and genuineness of the Aadhaar card itself. It is clarified that Aadhaar will not be treated as a proof of citizenship,” the bench ordered, directing the Election Commission to issue instructions to its field officials without delay.
The ruling is crucial because it mandates the ECI to treat Aadhaar at par with the 11 previously notified documents. It also requires the poll body to verify its authenticity when establishing a voter’s identity and residence.
The courtroom witnessed sharp exchanges as senior advocate Kapil Sibal, representing the Rashtriya Janata Dal (RJD), alleged that the ECI had deliberately excluded Aadhaar. He argued that booth-level officers were penalised for accepting Aadhaar and showed notices restricting officials to only 11 notified documents. Sibal questioned the fairness of the process, asking why a universal document like Aadhaar was being sidelined in a supposedly inclusive revision.
When asked if the petitioners wanted voter eligibility to be decided solely by Aadhaar, Sibal responded that his inclusion in the 2025 electoral roll was already confirmed and citizenship could not be questioned at the booth level.
ECI’s counsel, senior advocate Rakesh Dwivedi, maintained that Aadhaar was being accepted but could not be proof of citizenship. He emphasised that the Commission had constitutional powers to address citizenship questions while preparing rolls. However, the bench expressed concern that the Commission’s stance in court was inconsistent with its field-level directions, which continued to list only 11 documents.
The judges reminded both parties that the legal framework was clear: Aadhaar cannot serve as proof of citizenship but is recognised as a proof of identity under the Representation of the People Act. Justice Bagchi observed that Aadhaar carried statutory value and should be accepted for scrutiny like other documents.
Supporting Sibal’s plea, senior counsels Abhishek Manu Singhvi and Gopal Sankaranarayanan pressed for Aadhaar’s explicit inclusion. The bench questioned why Aadhaar could not be accepted when several of the other listed documents, such as ration cards, also did not prove citizenship. Dwivedi warned against excessive inclusivity, stating that misuse could not be allowed and insisted that almost all applicants had already submitted one of the eleven approved documents.
Sibal countered that the issue was not statistical but about principle. He stressed that BLOs could not decide citizenship independently and Aadhaar’s inclusion as the twelfth document, subject to verification, was necessary to ensure fairness.
The controversy stems from the ongoing electoral roll revision in Bihar, where nearly 6.5 million names were excluded from the draft rolls released last month. Opposition parties, led by RJD, argue that genuine voters are being excluded due to technical issues and unclear instructions, while the ECI maintains that the revision is vital after nearly two decades.
Earlier, on September 1, the Supreme Court had recorded the ECI’s assurance that claims and objections would be entertained even after the statutory deadline. The court had also ordered the deployment of para-legal volunteers to assist voters. However, confusion over Aadhaar’s validity forced the court to issue a direct clarification on Monday.
The bench reiterated that genuine citizens must be included in the rolls, while those relying on forged or fake documents should be excluded. It observed that Aadhaar could be accepted as the twelfth document with verification under the law.
The SIR exercise has now become a heated political issue ahead of the Bihar assembly elections. Opposition parties from the INDIA bloc have staged protests in Parliament and demanded a debate on what they describe as an unprecedented revision before state polls. They also warned that the model could be extended nationwide.
Union home minister Amit Shah, in a Sitamarhi rally last month, accused the Opposition of resisting the revision because names of infiltrators were being removed. He declared that “infiltrators have no right to vote” and criticised the RJD and Congress for opposing the exercise.
While the government accuses the Opposition of politicising electoral reforms, the Opposition counters that the timing, methods, and document requirements of the SIR threaten the voting rights of genuine electors, especially among migrants, minorities, and the poor.
