‘Breathes life into the democratic process’: What the Supreme Court said when it upheld SIR | Today’s news

The Supreme Court of India on 27 May upheld the constitutional validity of the Bihar Election Commission’s Special Intensive Review (SIR) exercise.

The Supreme Court said the poll panel was acting in the interest of free and fair elections, adding that it had the power to maintain voter lists under the constitutional system and the Representation of the People Act.

Read also | Supreme Court SIR LIVE: SC upholds validity of SIR in Bihar

The verdict was with respect to the lot the lawsuits alleged that Electoral Commission does not have powers under Article 326 of the Constitution, Representation of the People Act,1950 and the rules framed thereunder to conduct SIR on such larger form.

The bench said that the SIR cannot be struck down merely because it does not follow certain procedural modalities envisaged by the law and that conducting the review does not violate the Representation of the People Act but instead “breathes life into the democratic process of elections”.

A bench at the head Chief Justice of India Surya Kant he reserved his verdict on the reasons on 29 January.

“The power under section 21(3) is clearly intended to operate in exceptional situations and is a special statutory mechanism designed by Parliament for special requirements affecting the electoral process,” the court said, according to legal news website Bar and Bench.

The batch of petitions, filed in June last year following the ECI’s decision to conduct the SIR exercise in Bihar and other states, includes pleas filed by the election watchdog, Association for Democratic Reforms(ADR), civil rights group People’s Union for Civil Liberties (PUCL), political activist Yogendra Yadav, Trinamool Congress leader Mahua Moitra, RJD MP Manoj Jha, Congress leader KC Venugopal, among others.

The exercise contemplated by Section 21(3) is substantially different from the normal review regime contemplated by Section 21(2) read with Article 25.

Read also | SC to deliver verdict today on pleas challenging SIR of Bihar electoral rolls

“When the statute itself authorizes a special review at any time for reasons to be recorded and in such manner as the Election Commission may deem fit, the impugned exercise cannot be invalidated merely because it does not conform in all respects to the ordinary modalities contemplated in an ordinary review,” it said.

Wednesday’s verdict takes on significance as it confirms the electoral commission’s powers to conduct intensive revisions of electoral rolls to ensure the accuracy and integrity of voter rolls.

“In our considered opinion, the impugned SIR does not replace the Representation of the People Act and the Rules. Rather, it breathes life into the constitutional mandate under Article 324 in the precise statutory contours provided by Section 21(3). It cannot therefore be said that the Commission acted beyond its statutory powers,” the Court ruled.

Earlier this month, the Electoral Commission announced that Phase III Special Intensive Review (SIR) in 19 states and union territories. Phase 1 was conducted in Bihar between June and September 2025, ahead of the 2025 state assembly elections, while Phase II was conducted in nine states and three UTs between October 2025 and February 2026.

Here are the most important updates from the Supreme Court’s May 27 verdict, as reported by legal news website LiveLaw:

-ECI cannot be said to have acted beyond statutory powers by applying the SIR. It cannot be said ultra vires because the exercise is different from ordinary.

-SIR is not a process to subvert but to ensure the mandate of free and fair elections.

-This exercise is independent in nature and does not violate the constitutional imperative of free and fair elections. Instead, it is an exercise following Section 21(3) of the Representation of the People Act in conjunction with Article 324 of the Constitution and is intended to promote the very objectives that the constitutional framework seeks to protect.

– The contested exercise meets the requirements of proportionality. The measures taken have a reasonable relation to the objectives to be achieved, are not manifestly disproportionate and are accompanied by sufficient procedural safeguards to prevent arbitrary exclusion.

-The exercise was based on the legitimate and constitutionally based purpose of restoring the accuracy, completeness and integrity of the electoral rolls.

-As the SIR is legally sustainable, it is not inconsistent with the RP Act.

-The requirement to demonstrate as intended is fully valid. we are of the view that the deletion in the SIR cannot be said to be contrary to the procedure in the rules. validity of documents – after processing 11 documents and including aadhar card in our order we are not able to accept that reasoning that the set of documents required by ECI is arbitrary. it is not practical for document verification to be unmanaged.

The review exercise does not violate the Representation of the People Act but instead breathes life into the democratic process of elections.

The Election Commission last year launched the SIR exercise in Bihar, which followed in other states, following which a series of challenges were filed in the Supreme Court challenging the constitutional validity of the exercise.

SIR in Bihar was conducted in the first phase of the exercise.