Archive · 5 Oct 2026
Justice Bhuyan Criticizes Voter Roll Revision as Constitutional Negation
Justice Ujjal Bhuyan spoke against a process called SIR, which changes voter lists.
He said removing many people’s names could take away their chance to vote.
He said voter names should not be removed without notice and a chance to respond, unless the voter has died.
People protested against SIR in Mumbai, Delhi and Patna.
Some protesters said the process might remove people who should still be allowed to vote.
In Mumbai, demonstrators also called for the chief election official to resign.
The protests came after a report said two Election Commissioners had raised objections about decisions linked to SIR.
Supreme Court Justice Ujjal Bhuyan criticized the Special Intensive Revision (SIR), saying a process that disenfranchises millions strikes at the heart of the Constitution.
Bhuyan said SIR violates the guarantees of equality under Article 14 and universal adult suffrage under Article 326.
He said an enrolled voter’s name should not be deleted without notice and a hearing, except in the case of a deceased voter.
Protests against SIR took place in Mumbai, Delhi and Patna; demonstrators in Mumbai demanded Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar’s resignation.
The protests followed a report describing objections by two Election Commissioners to key SIR-related decisions; protesters say the exercise could remove genuine voters.
- Who
- Supreme Court Justice Ujjal Bhuyan; protesters in Mumbai, Delhi and Patna; and, in Mumbai, Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar.
- What
- Bhuyan criticized the Special Intensive Revision of electoral rolls, while protests against the exercise took place in several cities.
- When
- Bhuyan spoke on Sunday at a moot court valedictory function; protests were reported on Sunday, September 4.
- Where
- The speech was at Nalsar in Hyderabad; protests were reported in Mumbai, Delhi and Patna.
- Why
- Bhuyan said large-scale voter deletions could deny citizens voting rights and violate constitutional guarantees; protesters said the exercise could remove genuine voters.
Critics of SIR
SIR process
Constitutional impact
Critics of SIR
Bhuyan argued that disenfranchising large numbers of citizens is arbitrary and conflicts with Articles 14 and 326.
SIR process
The article provides no direct response from supporters or officials defending SIR.
Effect on voter lists
Critics of SIR
Protesters contend that SIR is designed to remove large numbers of genuine voters.
SIR process
The article does not include a response from the Election Commission or other SIR proponents.
Removal of enrolled voters
Critics of SIR
Bhuyan said a voter's name should not be deleted without notice and a hearing, except if the voter is dead.
SIR process
The article does not describe the process's rules or provide an opposing account.
- Judge
- Supreme Court Justice Ujjal Bhuyan
- Issue
- Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls
- Constitutional provisions cited
- Articles 14 and 326
- Bhuyan's stated safeguard
- An enrolled voter's name should not be deleted without notice and a hearing, except in the case of a dead voter.
- Reported protest locations
- Mumbai, Delhi and Patna
- Mumbai protest demand
- Resignation of Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar
- Report cited in the article
- It described two Election Commissioners recording objections over key SIR-related decisions.