Supreme Court LIVE: Prashant Bhushan Slams Election Commission Over Voter Deletions

Описание: Bhushan repeatedly argued that the Election Commission of India (ECI) failed to be transparent during the SIR exercise. He pointed out that the Commission only published the list of approximately 65 lakh deleted voters after the Supreme Court directed it to do so, instead of proactively disclosing deletions and the underlying reasons online in a clear, searchable format as required by its own rules and manuals. He criticised the ECI for issuing “cyclostyled” notices to millions of people without properly uploading detailed voter data or explanations of deletions, impeding affected individuals’ ability to challenge wrongful removals.

Bhushan contended that instead of “cleaning up” the electoral roll, the SIR process compounded existing problems. He argued that the final electoral roll still contained significant numbers of duplicate entries (he cited roughly five lakh) and that the exercise lacked proper de-duplication software, leading to persistent inaccuracies. He also highlighted that many long-standing voters were treated as new applicants — forced to re-register using Form 6 — effectively shifting the burden onto individuals and risking exclusion of eligible voters who lack formal documentation.

Bhushan emphasised that the ECI did not follow procedures laid out in the 1960 Registration of Electors Rules and related manuals, including public display of claims/objections and weekly data sharing with stakeholders. He argued that the Commission had neither disclosed nor justified the legal basis for the accelerated SIR exercise, raising concerns about arbitrary application and lack of due process.

In essence, Bhushan’s submissions focused on lack of transparency, procedural lapses, and the real-world impact of SIR on voter participation and electoral roll integrity — urging the Court to enforce statutory safeguards and make detailed data publicly accessible so that wrongful deletions can be challenged effectively.

Fair Use Policy

This content is shared strictly for purposes of news reporting, commentary, criticism, scholarship, and research, in accordance with Section 107 of the Copyright Act, 1976. Fair use is a statutory exception that permits limited use of copyrighted material for non-profit, educational, or personal purposes.

Court proceedings shown or described here are shared in line with the Supreme Court’s decisions in Swapnil Tripathi v. Supreme Court of India (2018) and ANI Media Private Limited vs. Wikimedia Foundation(2025), which recognise the value of transparency, open courts, and public access to judicial hearings.