Overview
- A two‑judge bench delivered the judgment that validated the Special Intensive Revision program and its procedures, finding the exercise lawful under Article 324 and Section 21(3) of the Representation of the People Act; the court said the SIR met proportionality and preserved basic procedural safeguards.
- The court held that the Election Commission may carry out a limited enquiry into citizenship for electoral purposes but clarified that deletions do not determine legal citizenship and ordered the ECI to refer names removed on citizenship grounds to the competent authority within four weeks.
- Implementation of SIR already removed or flagged millions of names in states where it ran, with reported figures including roughly 9.1 million removals and 2.71 million 'logical discrepancy' cases in West Bengal, raising fears of large‑scale disenfranchisement for young, migrant and poor voters.
- Critics and former officials say the judgment understates ground realities: they point to rushed timelines, tight documentation rules, limited practical remedies for wrongly deleted voters and doubts about the competent authority’s capacity to adjudicate millions of referrals before the next elections.
- Political responses split sharply, with the Election Commission and governing parties welcoming the verdict and opposition parties and civil‑society groups planning campaigns and legal and political challenges over access, restoration processes and the human impact of mass deletions.