Court Rejects Bhushan’s Idea On Illegals
New Delhi: Supreme Court on Thursday asked the Election Commission to implement in Tamil Nadu the court directed procedure for submission of documents by voters flagged under ‘logical discrepancy’ category during Special Intensive Revision of West Bengal electoral rolls, prompting the EC to request the SC to extend it to all states undergoing SIR of voter lists.A bench of Chief Justice Surya Kant and Justice Joymalya Bagchi, dealing with petitions by politicians from ruling DMK party, said the names of voters categorised under ‘logical discrepancies’ by EC would be displayed at public places, panchayat and taluk offices along with the reasons for such categorisation and documents required to be furnished by them.“The person receiving the documents from voters would issue a receipt. However, hearing of voters for inclusion of their names in electoral rolls would be conducted at taluka level officers,” the bench said and directed the TN govt to provide adequate staff to the EC to carry out the task. It allowed the voters to submit the documents within 10 days of display of the list by EC.It also asked the DGP, SPs and collectors to ensure no law and order situation emerges to scuttle the SIR exercise. This prompted EC counsel and senior advocate D S Naidu to request the SC to extend the order to all states where SIR of electoral rolls are being carried out. In its order, the bench recorded – “We expect the EC to comply with these directions on a pan-India basis.”In another hearing, the CJI-led bench concluded hearing on the challenge to the constitutional validity of SIR, which was first carried out in Bihar and then extended to 12 other states, after a three month long hearing that saw contrasting arguments put forth by the poll body and petitioners.Appearing for Association for Democratic Reforms, advocate Prashant Bhushan said EC cannot remove a person from the voter list if he/she gives a self-declaration claiming to be an Indian citizen.He said if anyone objects to the citizenship of a voter, then the onus is on the complainant to produce the voter list from Bangladesh to substantiate the accusation of illegal migrants. The bench laughed and said, “You know this is not possible. How will someone get the voter list from Bangladesh containing the name of an alleged illegal migrant figuring in the voter list of an Indian state.”
