Supreme Court’s Big Verdict On Bihar SIR: No Extension For Claims And Objections, Transparency Must Be Ensured

National News: The Supreme Court has clearly stated on the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) going on in Bihar that the date for claims and objections will not be extended now. RJD and AIMIM had requested that voters be given more time, but the court rejected it. The court said that the Election Commission has already given enough time, and now it would not be right to prolong the process further.

Responsibility of the Election Commission

The court instructed the Election Commission that transparency should be maintained at all costs. The commission was also told that political parties should get the correct information and they should be supported. The commission told the court that if anyone has any objection or claim, they can do so even after September 1, but a decision on it will be taken by the last date of nomination.

Argument by lawyers

During the hearing, the senior lawyer on behalf of the Commission said that crores of people have submitted their documents. About 99.5 percent of the voters have completed the process. On the other hand, lawyer Prashant Bhushan argued that the commission is not following its own rules properly. He said that according to the rules, the prescribed procedure for claims and objections should be followed.

The judge's harsh comments

Justice Surya Kant said during the hearing that if you verify a thousand people today and find mistakes in a hundred of them, will you wait for months to disclose it? The commission said no; in such a situation action will be taken within seven days. The court also said that this is a continuous process and laxity will not be tolerated in it.

Dispute over removal of name

The Election Commission said that most of the claims and objections are for the removal of names. The reason given is that many voters are no longer alive, or they have gotten their names added somewhere else. The Commission said that this time around 2.7 lakh names are being removed. Many times people themselves come forward and ask that their name be removed from the list.

Concerns of political parties

Political parties alleged that their objections were not being taken seriously. But the court said that the parties have submitted very few applications. For example, RJD submitted only 10 claims, and CPI (M) submitted around 100 claims. The court said that if you are really serious, then documents and evidence should be submitted on a large scale.

Final message of the court

The Supreme Court finally said that this is not just a matter of extending the date but of the convenience of voters and the transparency of democracy. The court ordered that paralegal volunteers be appointed through the State Legal Services Authority so that voters and political parties can easily file claims and objections. The court said that now political parties should work in a spirit of cooperation instead of complaining.