Can SIR Decide Citizenship? Supreme Court’s Key Observation In Big Order

New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Wednesday upheld the legality of the Special Intensive Revision (SIR),. The top court said that the removal of names from the electoral rolls as part of the exercise does not amount to a determination of citizenship. A bench of Chief Justice Surya Kant and Justice Joymalya Bagchi made this remark while hearing petitions on the SIR.Notably, most of the petitioners were opposition parties. They argued that the SIR exercise, which is being conducted by the Election Commission, was a citizenship verification exercise by backdoor. The bench also held that the inquiry carried out under the SIR process was not a determination of citizenship and was confined solely to participation in elections."We are of the considered

opinion that the Commission is empowered, in the exercise of its constitutional mandate, to undertake a limited enquiry into citizenship for the purpose of satisfying itself as to eligibility for inclusion in the electoral roll.," the top court said."Such an enquiry does not amount to a determination of citizenship in the strict sense, and any action taken pursuant thereto is confined to electoral consequences alone," it added.SC Upholds EC's Powers:The top court on Wednesday upheld the power of the Election Commission of India to conduct the SIR of electoral rolls. The Apex Court delivered the verdict on a batch of petitions challenging the Special Intensive Revision of electoral rolls in Bihar. A bench headed by Chief Justice Surya Kant had on January 29 reserved its verdict on the pleas, including the one filed by NGO Association for Democratic Reforms (ADR). The Supreme Court said that the process is "consistent with the constitutional mandate for free and fair elections." The court observed that the exercise cannot be termed ultra vires, adding that the ECI has not acted outside its statutory powers and that SIR is distinct from routine revisions.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XJjhdrm7vB0

"SIR fulfils proportionality and are not manifestely execessive. It was founded by constitutional purpose of restoration of accuracy of electoral rolls. The measures adopted by the ECI can't be held to be disproportionate," it said.The top court had commenced final arguments in the matter on August 12 last year. It had observed that the inclusion or exclusion of names in the electoral rolls falls within the constitutional remit of the Election Commission.