The Supreme Court on Thursday observed that the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) process in Bihar might require justification. A Bench comprising Chief Justice of India Surya Kant and Justice Joymalya Bagchi was hearing pleas challenging the validity of the SIR and seeking its deferment.
Senior Advocate Abhishek Manu Singhvi, representing the People’s Union for Civil Liberties (PUCL) and seven political parties, argued, “This is en masse exercise which the ECI is drawing from Article 324, which is not allowed. This is lack of jurisdiction I am arguing…plugging of loopholes here and there will not help,” according to Bar and Bench.
CJI Kant responded, “Going by your argument, ECI will never have power of SIR…This is not routine updation…but if a special revision is being done…then perhaps the process needs to be justified.” Singhvi added, “This Court has given a lot of healing touches in the past 6 months. But what is not law remains not a law,” the report added.
Concerns over authority of BLOs and constitutional limits
Senior Advocate Kapil Sibal raised questions on the role of Booth Level Officers (BLOs), saying, “Can the BLO (booth level officer) judge if a person is of unsound mind? It is for authorities outside the scope of the Act…A teacher appointed in a school cannot be a BLO to determine this right and that is why substantively this is unreasonable.” Justice Bagchi noted, “We have to see whether in the normative scheme of the Act and the allied laws, the notice that they have given is ultra vires or not.”
Singhvi further contended, “The Election Commission, in the garb of passing orders for regulating the conduct of elections, cannot take upon itself the purely legislative activity which has been reserved, under the scheme of the Constitution, only to Parliament and the State Legislatures. By no standards can it be said that the Commission is a third chamber in the legislative process within the scheme of the Constitution.”
During the hearing, the CJI also asked, “If Parliament next says take away fundamental rights of someone, can that be done?” Singhvi replied, “Of course no. Parliament decided so far and no further on four features. No way by which a massification can be done. 2003 people are not touched. Now, after so many revisions you subject so many sub-classifications…no rational nexus can be achieved…”
SIR expanded to other states amid legal challenges
The Election Commission had initially directed the SIR in Bihar in June 2025. Despite petitions challenging the exercise, the ECI extended the SIR to Tamil Nadu, West Bengal, and Kerala on October 27. Subsequent petitions challenging these exercises have also been filed.
The Supreme Court will hear the Kerala SIR plea on December 2, the Tamil Nadu petition on December 4, and the West Bengal challenge on December 9. Meanwhile, the Bihar SIR has already been completed as the Court did not stay the process. Parties including the CPI(M), CPI, and Indian Union Muslim League leader PK Kunhalikutty have moved the Court challenging the validity of the SIR process.