Mahua Moitra Moves Supreme Court Against EC’s Bihar Voter List Revision Order

Trinamool Congress MP Mahua Moitra has approached the Supreme Court challenging the Election Commission of India’s (ECI) directive for a Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls in Bihar, calling it unconstitutional and potentially disenfranchising.

In her petition filed under Article 32 of the Constitution, Moitra has sought the quashing of the ECI’s June 24 order, alleging it violates Articles 14, 19(1)(a), 21, 325, and 328 of the Constitution, as well as key provisions of the Representation of People Act, 1950 and the Registration of Electors Rules, 1960.

“If not set aside, the order could result in large-scale disenfranchisement of genuine voters and undermine the democratic process,” the plea argues.

Moitra contends this is the first time in India that enrolled voters—many of whom have voted in previous elections—are being asked to re-prove their citizenship. The SIR order reportedly requires submission of documents such as parental proof of citizenship for inclusion or retention in the rolls, which the plea calls ultra vires of Article 326.

Concerns Over Disenfranchisement

The petition warns that the ECI’s move sets a dangerous precedent that could be replicated in other states, and has urged the top court to restrain such orders nationwide. Moitra’s plea, filed through advocate Neha Rathi, states the documentation requirements and methodology go beyond what the Constitution and electoral laws prescribe.

A similar plea has also been filed by the Association for Democratic Reforms (ADR), an election watchdog NGO, through advocate Prashant Bhushan. ADR argues the EC’s order is arbitrary, violates due process, and risks disenfranchising lakhs of genuine voters, especially given the short timeline for the exercise.

“The directive lacks safeguards, includes unreasonable deadlines, and is almost guaranteed to result in the mass exclusion of eligible voters,” ADR said.

EC Defends Move

The Election Commission has justified the revision citing factors such as rapid urbanisation, high migration, unreported deaths, and the suspected inclusion of illegal foreign nationals. It says the objective is to ensure accurate and credible voter rolls and insists the revision will adhere to Article 326 and Section 16 of the RP Act.

The revision is being conducted through house-to-house verification by booth-level officers. The last such SIR in Bihar was done in 2003.

Wider Legal Challenge

Moitra and ADR are not alone. Other civil society groups like the PUCL and individuals like Yogendra Yadav have also filed petitions challenging the EC’s order. They argue the move undermines the right to vote and violates the fundamental principles of universal adult suffrage.

The Supreme Court is expected to hear the matter in the coming days.