The Supreme Courtroom on Tuesday issued discover to the Election Fee of India on a writ petition difficult the ECI’s resolution to conduct solely a “Particular Revision” of the electoral roll in Assam as an alternative of a “Particular Intensive Revision” forward of the 2026 Meeting elections.
A bench comprising Chief Justice of India Surya Kant and Justice Joymalya Bagchi posted the matter to subsequent Tuesday.
Senior Advocate Vijay Hansaria, for the petitioner, submitted that “Assam has singled out” regardless of having a big presence of unlawful migrants. Hansaria underscored that the Supreme Courtroom’s judgments, together with the latest judgment in In Re : Part 6A Citizenship Act, referred to the issue of infiltration in Assam. Nevertheless, in distinction with the strategy undertaken in different States, the ECI will not be asking folks in Assam to submit any paperwork whereas submitting enumeration varieties.
Hansaria submitted that the ECI had informed the Courtroom in earlier proceedings that they’d conduct pan-India SIR. “I do not perceive why Assam is singled out. Nothing is required in Assam. No doc required. “
CJI Surya Kant mentioned that “they may have accomplished it so due to the particular legal guidelines in Assam, the structure of foreigners tribunals and many others. Is perhaps.” Hansaria replied that ECI has not mentioned something on document. He pressed for a keep of the method in Assam. Nevertheless, the bench was not inclined to go an order with out listening to the ECI.
The petition has been filed by Mrinal Kumar Choudhury, former President of the Gauhati Excessive Courtroom Bar Affiliation. It alleges that whereas States comparable to Bihar, Chhattisgarh, Gujarat, Kerala, Madhya Pradesh, Rajasthan, Tamil Nadu, Uttar Pradesh, West Bengal, Goa and UTs together with Andaman and Nicobar Islands, Lakshadweep and Puducherry are present process Particular Intensive Revision, Assam has been singled out for a much less rigorous course of.
In response to the plea, Particular Revision doesn’t require electors to submit paperwork proving citizenship, age or residence. In distinction, Particular Intensive Revision mandates manufacturing of paperwork to justify inclusion within the voter record. The petitioner argues that given Assam’s historical past of large-scale unlawful immigration, the State requires stricter verification.
The petition depends on earlier official assessments, together with the 1997 report of Assam Governor Lt. Gen. S. Okay. Sinha and statements of former Union House Minister Indrajit Gupta relating to the presence of 40 to 50 lakh unlawful immigrants within the State. It additionally cites Supreme Courtroom observations within the Sarbananda Sonowal instances and litigation regarding Part 6A of the Citizenship Act.
The petition, contends that there’s “no distinction on the bottom realities” between Assam and the opposite States the place Particular Intensive Revision is underway. The plea additional factors out that the ECI had earlier said, each in its June 24 order for Bihar and in an affidavit filed in July earlier than the Supreme Courtroom within the Affiliation for Democratic Reforms case, that Particular Intensive Revision could be performed throughout the nation.
The petition additionally highlights sharp demographic modifications in Assam and argues that failing to conduct Particular Intensive Revision will enable ineligible voters, together with unlawful immigrants, to stay on the rolls, probably affecting the result of the upcoming Meeting elections.
The petition has been filed via Ansauya Choudhary.
Case : MRINAL KUMAR CHOUDHURY v. ELECTION COMMISSION OF INDIA | W.P.(C) No. 1191/2025
Leave a Reply