SC seeks ECI reply on plea against limited electoral roll revision in Assam

THe sublime margaret court on tues sought-after(a) a response from the Election direction of India (ECI) on a petition challenging the poll body’s decision to carry out only a special revision (SR) of the electoral roll in Assam, rather than a more rigorous special intensive revision (SIR), ahead of the 2026 Assembly elections.A bench of Chief Justice of India Surya Kant and Justice Joymalya Bagchi listed the matter on December 16 after hearing senior advocate Vijay Hansaria, who appeared for the petitioner.Hansaria argued that Assam had been “singled out” despite the state’s long-acknowledged concerns over illegal migration. He submitted that unlike other states where SIR is under way, electors in Assam are not required to produce any documents while filling enumeration forms under the ongoing Special Revision.“Nothing is required in Assam. No document required. I don’t understand why Assam is singled out,” he said, noting that the Supreme Court’s recent ruling on the Citizenship Act as well as earlier decisions repeatedly highlighted infiltration concerns in the state.He further pointed out that the ECI had informed the court in earlier proceedings that a pan-India special intensive revision would be conducted.At this, the CJI remarked that the Commission might have adopted a different approach in view of “special laws in Assam” and the structure of foreigner tribunals.However, Hansaria insisted that the ECI had placed no such reasoning on record and sought a stay of the ongoing process. The bench declined to pass interim orders without first hearing the Commission.The petition has been filed by former Gauhati High Court Bar Association president Mrinal Kumar Choudhury through advocate Ansauya Choudhary. It contends that while states including Bihar, Chhattisgarh, Gujarat, Kerala, Madhya Pradesh, Rajasthan, Tamil Nadu, Uttar Pradesh, West Bengal, and several Union territories are undergoing SIR, Assam alone has been limited to a less stringent SR.The plea states that an SR does not require electors to furnish proof of citizenship, age, or residence, whereas SIR mandates production of supporting documents for inclusion in the electoral roll. Given Assam’s history of large-scale immigration, the petitioner argues that the state needs stricter, not relaxed, verification.The petition cites official assessments such as the 1997 report by then Assam Governor Lt Gen SK Sinha and public statements by former Union home minister Indrajit Gupta suggesting the presence of 40–50 lakh illegal migrants in Assam, as well as Supreme Court observations on the issue in some previous rulings.It asserts that there is “no difference on the ground realities” between Assam and other states where SIR is currently being implemented, and notes that the ECI’s June 24 order for Bihar and an affidavit filed in July in the Association for Democratic Reforms case reflected an intent to carry out SIR nationwide.Last month, Assam chief minister Himanta Biswa Sarma welcomed the ECI’s decision to undertake SR with 1 January 2026 as the qualifying date, saying the exercise would ensure “clean, updated and accurate electoral rolls” and promising full cooperation to the poll body.The Commission’s decision to use SR instead of SIR or special summary revision (SSR) followed multiple consultations and considered factors including the National Register of Citizens (NRC) and the category of ‘D-Voters’ - individuals whose citizenships status is under adjudication.The ECI clarified that D-Voters will remain in the draft roll without fresh verification, and their status will change only upon orders of a Foreigners’ Tribunal or court.It also outlined distinctions between Special Revision and SIR: in SIR, electors must submit documentary proof through printed enumeration forms, whereas SR and SSR rely on pre-filled registers and standard Forms 6, 7 and 8 without mandatory document submission.