The
Supreme Court today agreed with the Election Commission of India (ECI) that the Aadhaar card cannot be treated as final proof of citizenship and must be
independently verified.
A
Bench of Justices Surya Kant and Joymalya Bagchi made this observation while
hearing petitions against the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral
rolls in Bihar.
“The
Election Commission is correct in saying that Aadhaar can’t be accepted as
conclusive proof of citizenship; it has to be verified. See Section 9 of the
Aadhaar Act,” Justice Kant told senior advocate Kapil Sibal, who appeared for
the petitioners.
The
judge also said, “Are petitioners saying that an Aadhaar card is proof of
citizenship? They are not saying that it is not a measure… the Aadhaar Act says
so.”
The
court is examining whether the ECI has the legal power to carry out this
verification exercise. Justice Kant remarked, “If they don’t have the power,
everything ends. But if they have the power, there can’t be a problem.” The
petitions challenge the ECI’s June 24 order to conduct the SIR in Bihar.
Speaking
for the petitioners, Sibal argued that the ECI’s process could lead to
large-scale voter exclusions, especially for those unable to submit the
required forms. He argued, even voters from the 2003 rolls had to fill fresh
forms, and failure to do so would lead to deletion, even without a change in
residence, the news report said.
Sibal
pointed to ECI data showing 72.4 million forms submitted, but about 6.5 million
names were excluded without proper checks on deaths or migration. “They admit
in their affidavit that they did not conduct any survey,” he told the court.
The
Bench asked how the 6.5 million figure was calculated and whether this fear was
based on facts or just an assumption. It noted that those who submitted forms
were already in the draft rolls.
Sibal
mentioned that there were 79 million voters in the 2025 list, with 49 million
from the 2003 list, and that 2.2 million were recorded as dead.
Advocate
Prashant Bhushan, also appearing for the petitioners, alleged the ECI had not
made public the list of voters removed due to death or change of residence.
“They say they have given some information to booth-level agents, but claim
they are not obliged to give it to anyone else,” he told the SC Bench. The
court said that if a voter provides an Aadhaar and a ration card, the ECI must
verify the details.
The
ECI has defended the Special Intensive Revision (SIR), citing its powers under
Article 324 of the Constitution and Section 21(3) of the Representation of the
People Act, 1950. It said the revision was essential due to urban migration,
demographic changes, and outdated rolls that had not been intensively revised
for nearly 20 years.
The
commission maintained that the SIR would ensure only eligible citizens were on
the rolls before the Bihar Assembly elections.
On
July 10, the court had asked the ECI to consider Aadhaar, ration card, and EPIC
card for verification. Later, the ECI filed an affidavit stating neither
Aadhaar nor a ration card could prove eligibility to vote. The petitioners have
called this “absurd”.