Aadhaar should be treated as valid proof of identity for SIR exercise: Supreme Court

Mangalore Today News Network

New Delhi, Sep 8, 2025: The Supreme Court on Monday ordered that Aadhaar must be accepted as the twelfth valid document for inclusion in Bihar’s electoral rolls during the ongoing special intensive revision (SIR), intervening after complaints that election officials were refusing to recognise it despite earlier directions.

A bench of justices Surya Kant and Joymalya Bagchi turned down the Election Commission of India’s (ECI) reservations against formally adding Aadhaar to its list of approved identity proofs, stressing that while the document cannot establish citizenship, it remains a valid indicator of identity and residence.

“The Aadhaar card shall be treated as the 12th document by the ECI. However, it is open for the authorities to examine the validity and genuineness of the Aadhaar card itself. It is clarified that Aadhaar will not be treated as a proof of citizenship,” directed the bench, adding that the poll panel must issue instructions to its field officials “during the course of the day.”

The direction is significant as it not only mandates the ECI to treat Aadhaar on par with the 11 other notified documents but also requires the poll body to verify its authenticity for establishing a voter’s identity and residence.

The order followed heated exchanges in court, where senior advocate Kapil Sibal, appearing for the Rashtriya Janata Dal (RJD), accused the ECI of deliberately excluding Aadhaar. “What they are doing is shocking…Booth-level officers (BLOs) are being hauled up for accepting Aadhaar. We can show notices being issued by electoral registration officers which say no other document except the 11 notified ones will be accepted. Where is the inclusive exercise if a universal document like Aadhaar is being rejected?”

When the bench asked if the petitioners wanted the status of a voter to be determined solely on the basis of Aadhaar, Sibal replied: “I am already there in the electoral roll of 2025. Where is the question of proving anything? BLOs cannot determine my citizenship.”

The bench then turned to ECI’s counsel, senior advocate Rakesh Dwivedi, who maintained that Aadhaar was already being accepted but “cannot be a proof of citizenship.” He argued that the Commission has the constitutional mandate to look into citizenship questions when preparing electoral rolls: “There are provisions in the Constitution where an MP ceases to be a citizen and the President acts on the advice of the ECI. Similarly, for preparing rolls, the ECI can look into citizenship.”

But the bench expressed concern over the gap between the Commission’s position in court and the instructions given to officials on the ground. “Why does this copy mention just 11 documents and not Aadhaar despite our repeated orders? We want you to clarify this,” the court asked. Dwivedi said he would look into if “someone has erred” but insisted that the Commission had “publicised” the previous court order that Aadhaar would be accepted.

The bench also reminded both sides that the statutory framework was clear: Aadhaar cannot be elevated to proof of citizenship but does carry value under the Representation of the People Act. “Statute says and judicial dictum also says that Aadhaar is not proof of citizenship. But it is indeed a proof of identity and has some value. You should take it and examine it,” Justice Bagchi observed.

When senior counsel Abhishek Manu Singhvi and Gopal Sankaranarayanan supported Sibal’s plea for Aadhaar to be expressly added, the bench asked Dwivedi: “Why cannot you accept it as the 12th document? But for two -- birth certificate and passport, all other documents among the 11 are also not proofs of citizenship. You have already gone beyond the requirement of citizenship for the inclusivity this exercise needs.”

Dwivedi, however, cautioned against “over-inclusivity.” “The whole idea is that Aadhaar is being pressed to be used as a proof of citizenship. We cannot allow that misuse. Already 99.6% have submitted one of the 11 documents. For the 65 lakh excluded, Aadhaar is being permitted. Now there are some 200 odd instances being flagged. We must look at the whole picture,” he said

Sibal retorted that the issue was not of numbers but of principle: “Let there be a direction to include Aadhaar as the 12th document, subject to an inquiry by the ECI. BLOs cannot be left to decide citizenship on their own.”

The controversy arises from the special intensive revision of electoral rolls in Bihar, where nearly 6.5 million names were excluded from the draft rolls published last month. Opposition parties, led by RJD, allege that genuine voters are being disenfranchised by technical barriers and inconsistent instructions, while the ECI maintains the revision is necessary after nearly two decades without such an exercise.

On September 1, the Supreme Court had noted the ECI’s assurance that claims and objections would be accepted even beyond the statutory deadline of September 1 and directed the deployment of para-legal volunteers to help voters file claims online. However, persistent confusion over Aadhaar’s status forced the court to issue an explicit clarification on Monday.

“We must be very clear…Genuine citizens are entitled to be included in the rolls, while those claiming citizenship on the basis of forged or sham documents must be kept out. If you make Aadhaar the 12th document, you will still be able to verify it under the law,” said the bench.

SIR has become a major political flashpoint ahead of the Bihar assembly elections scheduled for later this year. Opposition parties in the INDIA bloc have staged protests in Parliament and written to Lok Sabha Speaker Om Birla seeking a special discussion on what they call an “unprecedented” revision so close to state polls. Eight parties, including Congress, RJD, Samajwadi Party, DMK, Trinamool Congress and Shiv Sena (UBT), have warned that the exercise could be replicated nationwide.

On August 8, Union home minister Amit Shah, addressing a rally in Bihar’s Sitamarhi, launched a sharp attack on Opposition leader Rahul Gandhi and the INDIA bloc, accusing them of opposing the revision because “names of infiltrators” were being removed from the lists. “Infiltrators have no right to vote. Names of infiltrators must be removed from the voters’ lists. But the Rashtriya Janata Dal and the Congress are opposing SIR in Bihar because the names of infiltrators are being deleted,” Shah said.

While the government has accused the Opposition of politicising electoral reforms, the Opposition contends that the SIR’s timing, methodology and documentation requirements threaten the fundamental right to vote of genuine electors, particularly among the poor, migrants, and minorities.