Writ Petition Filed in Supreme Court Challenging Assam’s Electoral Roll Revision Method

A Writ Petition has been filed in the Supreme Court challenging the Election Commission of India’s (ECI) decision to conduct a Special Revision of the electoral roll in Assam instead of a Special Intensive Revision (SIR), as ordered in the case dated 17 November 2025.

The petition, filed by Mrinal Kumar Choudhury, former President of the Gauhati High Court Bar Association, alleges that the ECI acted in an arbitrary and discriminatory manner by limiting Assam to a Special Revision, while other states, including Bihar, Chhattisgarh, Goa, Gujarat, Kerala, Madhya Pradesh, Rajasthan, Tamil Nadu, Uttar Pradesh, and West Bengal, along with UTs such as Andaman and Nicobar Islands, Lakshadweep, and Puducherry, are conducting Special Intensive Revisions.

The petition cites historical reports, including the Governor of Assam, Lt. Gen. S.K. Sinha’s report and statements from the then Home Minister Indrajit Gupta, highlighting the presence of 40–50 lakh illegal immigrants in Assam as far back as 1997. It also refers to the Supreme Court’s observations in the Sarbananda Sonowal Cases I and II and matters related to Section 6A of the Citizenship Act, raising concerns over the demographic impact of illegal immigrants.

The petitioner, represented by Senior Advocate Vijay Hansaria, argues that, unlike Special Intensive Revision in other states, where electors must submit proof of citizenship, age, and residence, the Special Revision in Assam does not require any such documentation. “There is no difference in ground realities between Assam and the twelve other states where SIR is being conducted,” the petition claims.

The petition also highlights an alleged inconsistency in the ECI’s approach. It cites the Commission’s earlier order on Bihar SIR dated 24 June 2025 and an affidavit filed on 21 July 2025 in the Association for Democratic Reforms vs. ECI [WP(C) No. 640/2025] case, where the ECI affirmed that Special Intensive Revision would be conducted Pan India.

Another Advocate on Record, Anasuya Choudhury, noted in the petition that Assam’s population has increased disproportionately compared to the rest of the country, primarily due to illegal immigration from neighbouring countries. She argued that the ECI has a constitutional mandate to revise the electoral roll and that the choice between intensive and summary revision cannot be left to absolute discretion. “In cases where a large number of ineligible voters are on the rolls, it is mandatory for the Commission to conduct intensive revision to ensure that such names are removed,” the petition said.

The Supreme Court is expected to take up the petition early next week, alongside a batch of petitions concerning Special Intensive Revision in other states and Union Territories.

Also Read: Supreme Court Rules Courts Cannot Fix Timelines for Governors or President to Approve Bills