Senior advocates Prashant Bhushan, Vrinda Grover, and Gopal Sankaranarayanan argued that the SIR process lacked transparency and excluded eligible voters. Bhushan highlighted that millions of voters’ details were deleted without proper public disclosure, raising concerns about fairness.
Advocate Rakesh Dwivedi, representing the ECI, maintained that the process was lawful and comprehensive replies would be filed. The Court granted 10 days for submission of additional replies on affidavits and legal objections.
Supreme Court Directions and Concerns
Justice J. Kant emphasized that the final voter list should be available at every polling station and accessible to political parties to maintain transparency. Petitioners stressed that real-time updates on inclusions and deletions must be made public, especially before the freeze of the final roll.
The Court noted the ongoing nature of the exercise and affirmed that the ECI is bound to ensure responsible publication of voter data. Petitioners also raised concerns about typographical errors and false documents filed during the SIR process.
Next Hearing Date
The Supreme Court adjourned the hearing and scheduled further arguments for November 4, 2025, to allow detailed legal scrutiny of the ECI’s process and submissions.