 |
|
Ashwini Upadhyay, a BJP leader, has filed a writ petition before the Supreme Court, initiating a legal challenge aimed at ensuring more rigorous and frequent revisions of electoral rolls across India. This petition specifically targets the Election Commission of India (ECI) and seeks directives for both the Union and State governments to conduct Special Intensive Revisions of Electoral Rolls regularly, especially before significant elections like Parliamentary, State Assembly, and Local Body Elections. The rationale behind the petition centers on the premise that accurate and up-to-date electoral rolls are critical for maintaining the integrity of the democratic process and preventing fraudulent voting activities. Upadhyay's petition also raises concerns about illegal immigration and seeks directives compelling all States to take stringent action against individuals and entities that facilitate the infiltration of illegal immigrants by providing fraudulent documentation. This part of the plea is deeply intertwined with national security concerns and the alleged manipulation of electoral demographics. The petition emphasizes what Upadhyay views as the core duty of the central and state governments, as well as the ECI, to conduct thorough and intensive revisions of voter lists. This, he argues, should send a strong message that India is committed to combating illegal infiltration. Furthermore, the plea advocates for executive action aimed at deterring corrupt individuals who aid and abet infiltrators, suggesting that such betrayals of public trust should be met with zero tolerance. During a court session, Upadhyay sought permission from a bench comprising Justice Sudhanshu Dhulia and Justice Joymalya Bagchi to serve the petition to the respondents. He also requested that the case be listed on July 10, aligning it with other petitions challenging the Special Intensive Revision of the Bihar Electoral Roll. The bench, however, clarified that the Registry would determine the listing after addressing any procedural defects in the petition. The Court’s order stipulated that the petitioner must first rectify any defects before the Registry could proceed with further actions. This procedural step highlights the importance of adherence to legal protocols and the meticulous scrutiny that petitions undergo before reaching substantive hearings. This case arrives amidst a backdrop of legal challenges regarding the ECI's decision to conduct a “Special Intensive Revision” of the Electoral Rolls in Bihar, particularly with impending assembly elections. Opposition leaders and human rights organizations have voiced their concerns, and Upadhyay's petition adds another layer to the debate by specifically calling for regular and intensive revisions of electoral rolls across the country. The petition points to Bihar, with its 243 Assembly constituencies, as an area of particular concern. It claims that each constituency harbors an estimated 8,000 to 10,000 illegal, duplicate, or ghost entries. Upadhyay asserts that even discrepancies involving a smaller number of votes, such as 2,000 to 3,000, can critically alter electoral outcomes, thereby undermining the democratic process. Upadhyay's plea references a previous Special Intensive Revision conducted in Bihar in 2003, contending that a new revision is overdue due to factors such as urbanization, migration, and the consistent failure to report deaths. These factors, he argues, contribute to inaccuracies in the electoral rolls and necessitate periodic and thorough revisions to maintain their integrity. Filed through Advocate Ashwani Dubey, the writ petition lists the Union of India (represented by the Ministries of Home and Law & Justice), the Election Commission, the governments of all states and union territories, and the Law Commission of India as respondents. This broad array of respondents underscores the extensive scope of the petition, which seeks systemic changes across multiple levels of governance. Upadhyay's petition emphasizes that only Indian citizens should be allowed to vote, arguing that illegal foreign infiltrators are negatively impacting the country's polity and policy. The petition contends that the demography of 200 districts and 1500 tehsils has undergone significant changes since Independence due to “massive illegal infiltration, deceitful religious conversion, and population explosion.” This statement touches upon sensitive issues of national identity, demographic shifts, and the potential ramifications for electoral representation. The petition invokes Article 324(1) of the Constitution, which grants the ECI the power of superintendence, direction, and control of elections. Upadhyay argues that accurate electoral rolls are vital to ensure free and fair elections, as mandated by Article 326. This constitutional argument forms a cornerstone of the legal challenge, reinforcing the idea that electoral integrity is a fundamental constitutional principle.
Furthermore, the petition cites Section 21(3) of the Representation of the People Act, 1950, which provides for special revisions when the normal revision cycle proves insufficient. This statutory reference provides the legal basis for demanding more frequent and intensive electoral roll revisions. The petitioner voices concerns about the perceived threat posed by “illegal Pakistani, Afghanistani, Bangladeshi, and Rohingya infiltrators,” claiming that they dilute legitimate votes and undermine public confidence and national security. The petition alleges that these infiltrators can decisively influence election results, particularly in closely contested races where victory margins often fall within a few hundred votes. This assertion highlights the potential vulnerability of the electoral system to manipulation and the perceived need for more robust safeguards. Upadhyay's petition frames illegal infiltration not merely as an immigration violation but as an act of waging war against the Indian state, encompassing organized crime and even treason. This severe characterization underscores the gravity of the alleged threat and serves to justify the need for stringent and decisive action. The plea asserts that infiltration has caused demographic disruption, created challenges for law enforcement, and provided a cover for anti-national activities such as terrorism, smuggling, human trafficking, and sabotage. It also claims that state governments are failing to invoke the provisions of the National Security Act (NSA) against infiltrators and those who assist them. This claim raises questions about the effectiveness of existing laws and their enforcement in addressing the issue of illegal immigration. According to the petition, the current version of Forms 6 and 8 under the Registration of Electors Rules, 1960, does not adequately address the citizenship status of applicants. Upadhyay argues that verifying citizenship is a core requirement for the right to vote under Article 326 and the Representation of the People Act, 1951. The petition highlights a prior exercise conducted in Assam in 1997, which involved door-to-door verification, leading to the designation of doubtful voters (D-voters), whose cases were subsequently referred to Foreigners Tribunals. Upadhyay claims that this process included safeguards of natural justice. This historical reference provides a precedent for conducting similar verification processes in other regions of India facing concerns about illegal immigration. The petition emphasizes the necessity of the Special Intensive Revision of the Bihar Electoral Roll to ensure that only genuine citizens are allowed to vote, acknowledging assurances from the ECI that no legitimate voter will be removed from the list. This acknowledgment underscores the importance of striking a balance between preventing fraudulent voting and protecting the rights of legitimate voters. Upadhyay's plea claims that the Seemanchal region of Bihar has experienced asymmetric population growth attributed to illegal immigration. It points to the region’s 47% Muslim population, which is significantly higher than Bihar’s statewide average of 18%. This assertion raises questions about the demographic impact of illegal immigration and its potential implications for electoral representation in the region. The petition alleges that infiltration in this region leads to economic and social consequences and undermines the rule of law, highlighting the wide-ranging ramifications of the issue. The case, registered as Diary No. 36126 of 2025, is officially titled Ashwini Kumar Upadhyay v. Union of India.
In summary, Ashwini Upadhyay’s writ petition to the Supreme Court aims to address perceived flaws in the electoral system related to the presence of illegal immigrants on voter rolls. By calling for regular and intensive electoral roll revisions, Upadhyay seeks to ensure the integrity of the democratic process and prevent foreign interference in elections. The petition’s claims regarding demographic changes and national security threats highlight the gravity of the issue, while the legal arguments presented invoke constitutional principles and statutory provisions. The outcome of this legal challenge could have significant implications for the future of electoral administration and the protection of national borders in India. The central thrust of the petition rests on the premise that accurate and thoroughly vetted electoral rolls are indispensable for upholding the principles of free and fair elections, as enshrined in the Constitution of India. The petition underscores the need for the Election Commission of India (ECI) and the Union and State governments to take proactive measures in ensuring that only legitimate Indian citizens are included in the voter lists. The plea contends that the infiltration of illegal immigrants poses a grave threat to the integrity of the democratic process by potentially influencing electoral outcomes and distorting the will of the electorate. Furthermore, the petition raises concerns about the potential impact of illegal immigration on national security and social cohesion. The petitioner argues that the influx of undocumented migrants can strain resources, exacerbate social tensions, and provide a cover for illegal activities such as terrorism, smuggling, and human trafficking. By invoking Article 324(1) of the Constitution, the petition emphasizes the ECI's constitutional mandate to oversee and ensure the fairness of elections. It asserts that this mandate includes the responsibility to maintain accurate and up-to-date electoral rolls, free from fraudulent or ineligible voters. The petition also highlights the importance of verifying the citizenship status of all voters to prevent non-citizens from participating in the electoral process. The petitioner references Section 21(3) of the Representation of the People Act, 1950, which allows for special revisions of electoral rolls when necessary. The petition argues that the current circumstances, marked by alleged large-scale illegal immigration, warrant the invocation of this provision to conduct comprehensive revisions of voter lists across the country. The petition also cites the example of a similar exercise conducted in Assam in 1997, where door-to-door verification was used to identify doubtful voters. This example serves as a precedent for the feasibility and effectiveness of such verification processes in identifying and removing ineligible voters from electoral rolls. The petition's claims regarding demographic changes in certain regions of India due to illegal immigration raise complex and sensitive issues. The petitioner argues that these demographic shifts can alter the electoral balance and potentially marginalize legitimate citizens. The petition's allegations regarding the failure of state governments to invoke the National Security Act (NSA) against illegal immigrants and their facilitators raise concerns about the effectiveness of law enforcement and border control measures. The petitioner's call for comprehensive revisions of electoral rolls reflects a broader concern about the integrity of the democratic process and the need to safeguard the rights of legitimate citizens. The petition seeks to ensure that only eligible voters participate in elections, thereby upholding the principles of free and fair elections and preserving the integrity of the democratic system. The petition's arguments regarding the constitutional and statutory basis for electoral roll revisions are grounded in the fundamental principles of democracy and the rule of law. The petition seeks to ensure that the electoral process is conducted in accordance with these principles and that the rights of all citizens are protected.