Key Points

The Supreme Court has stepped in to help voters excluded from Bihar's electoral rolls. Justices directed the state legal service authority to provide free legal assistance for filing appeals. The court expressed concern over discrepancies in affidavits submitted by excluded individuals. The case will continue hearing on October 16 while appeals can still be filed within the five-day window.

Key Points: Supreme Court Orders Bihar Legal Aid for Excluded SIR Voters

  • Supreme Court mandates Bihar legal services to assist excluded voters with ECI appeals
  • Bench notes discrepancies in affidavits filed by excluded individuals
  • ECI disputes claims of wrongful exclusion citing false affidavit instances
  • Five-day window remains open for voters to file appeals against exclusion
2 min read

Bihar SIR: SC asks state legal service authority to assist excluded voters in filing appeals with ECI

SC directs Bihar legal services to help voters left out of electoral rolls file ECI appeals. Free legal aid ensured for those excluded during Bihar SIR exercise.

"BSLSA is to issue necessary communication to ensure availability of paralegal volunteers - Supreme Court Bench"

New Delhi, October 9

The Supreme Court on Thursday asked the Bihar State Legal Service Authority (BSLSA) to issue directions to its district-level body for assisting voters excluded from the final electoral rolls after the Bihar Special Intensive Revision (SIR) exercise in filing appeals with the Election Commission of India (ECI).

To ensure free legal aid to the persons excluded from the final voters' list to file appeals against their exclusion, a bench of Justices Surya Kant and Joymalya Bagchi, BSLSA, is to issue necessary communication to the District Legal Services Authorities to ensure the availability of paralegal volunteers and legal aid counsels who can assist the excluded persons in filing appeals.

The bench passed the order after noting that there were discrepancies in the affidavits submitted before the top court by certain individuals who claimed that they had been incorrectly excluded.

Senior advocate Rakesh Dwivedi, appearing for ECI, disputed the veracity of the contents of the affidavit submitted by one particular individual.

Dwivedi raised an instance raised by the petitioner Association for Democratic Reforms (ADR) regarding a person whose name was included in the draft list getting deleted from the final list.

He refuted the claim, saying the person was not there in the draft list as he did not submit the enumeration form, and added that a false affidavit had been filed, which amounts to perjury.

He said excluded people can file appeals, as there is still a window of five days available for them.

The bench expressed displeasure and told advocate Prashant Bhushan, appearing for ADR, that when a document was handed to the court, there should have been more responsibility.

The apex court also heard arguments of political activist Yogendra Yadav and posted the case for hearing on October 16.

The apex court was hearing a batch of petitions challenging the poll panel's move to conduct SIR of electoral rolls in Bihar.

- ANI

Share this article:

Reader Comments

R
Rohit P
Good step but why does ECI need Supreme Court's intervention for basic voter rights? The system should be more transparent from the beginning. Filing false affidavits is wrong, but so is excluding genuine voters.
S
Sarah B
As someone working in election monitoring, I appreciate the court's balanced approach. Both sides need accountability - ECI for clean rolls and petitioners for accurate information.
A
Arjun K
Only 5 days window for appeals? That's too short for rural voters who might not even know they've been excluded! The process needs to be more voter-friendly. 🗳️
K
Karthik V
Legal services authority involvement is crucial. In Bihar, many voters don't understand the appeal process. Hope this sets a precedent for other states too.
M
Michael C
The court's displeasure about false affidavits is justified. Such actions undermine genuine cases and waste judicial time. Both sides need to be more responsible.

We welcome thoughtful discussions from our readers. Please keep comments respectful and on-topic.

Leave a Comment

Minimum 50 characters 0/50