During the Bihar SIR hearing, the Supreme Court urged the EC to issue a public notice detailing the list of websites or places where the panel will share the list of voters listed as dead, migrated or shifted in the state electoral rolls.
Published: August 14, 2025 4:38 PM IST
Bihar SIR Row: The Election Commission of India (ECI) on Thursday agreed to share the names of voters deleted in the Bihar Special Intensive Review (SIR) exercise after the Supreme Court grilled the poll panel for not making the details public. “Why can’t you disclose the names” of people who have died, migrated, or shifted to other constituencies?,” the apex court asked.
Why EC agreed to share list of deleted voters in Bihar SIR?
The EC replied that it had already given the list of deleted names to the political parties in the state. “Why can’t you put these names on a display board or on a website? Those aggrieved can take remedial measures within 30 days,” the top court asked.
The Supreme Court also urged the EC to issue a public notice detailing the list of websites or places where the panel will share the list of voters listed as dead, migrated or shifted in the state electoral rolls.
What EC said on EVM manipulation claims?
Meanwhile, the Election Commission rued that it is “caught between the struggle of political parties” as parties consider electronic voting machines (EVMs) as good if they win, but the machine suddenly becomes the villain if a party loses the elections.
“Caught between struggle of political parties, if they win EVM is good, if they lose EVM is bad,” the apex poll body told a two-bench SC panel of Justices Surya Kant and Joymalya Bagchi. The top court was hearing a plea challenging the EC’s decision to conduct the SIR in Bihar.
Bihar SIR row
On August 13 (Wednesday), the Supreme Court observed that electoral rolls cannot remain “static” and there is bound to be a revision, adding that the expanded list of acceptable documents of identity from seven to 11 for the Bihar SIR of voters’ list was in fact “voter-friendly and not exclusionary.”
The court ruled that the EC had the residual power to conduct such an exercise as it deemed fit, and also disagreed with a submission by a petitioner that the SIR of electoral rolls in poll-bound Bihar had no basis in law and ought to be quashed.
(With inputs from agencies)
About the Author
