Senior Supreme Court advocate Prashant Bhushan on Thursday, 9th October 2025, got pulled up by the apex court for submitting false affidavit in the Bihar SIR (Special Intensive Revision) case. As reported by LiveLaw, the SC bench of Justice Surya Kant and Justice Joymala Bagchi expressed its displeasure with Advocate Bhushan, the lawyer of the ADR (Association for Democratic Reforms), an NGO challenging the SIR in Bihar, for handing over the person’s affidavit without due verification.
Senior Advocate Rakesh Dwivedi, appearing for the Election Commission of India (ECI) pointed out that the particular instance raised by ADR about the individual whose name was included in the draft list but deleted from final list was incorrect as the person’s name not there in the draft list as he did not submit the enumeration form. Advocate Dwivedi pointed out that submitting false affidavit amounts to perjury and added that the organisation, ADR, must satisfy itself of the affidavit before bringing up to the court.
Advocate Dwivedi also pointed out that the allegations were raised by political parties to set narrative. He said how the political parties want to set narrative and offer no help, stating how they have now analysed how many Muslim voters were excluded from the list.
Justice Bagchi pulled up Advocate Bhushan and said how if such documents were handed over to him yesterday and hence he had a responsibility when he handed them over to the bench. Further expressing displeasure that the NGO represented by Bhushan had not done due diligence, Justice Bagchi pointed out how it is now demonstrated the facts are false.
When Justice Bagchi expressed displeasure over 20 other affidavits with similar claims which could be false, Advocate Bhushan said these are oral assertions. The Court, however, was relentless and said that he should have seen if Mohd Shahid’s name was indeed in the draft roll or not.
Bhushan then tried to argue how the process for the SIR in 2025 has deviated from the one followed in 2003. He claimed that in 2003, no one had to fill the enumeration form and how the list was treated as the base list. He pointed out that Booth Level Workers went from house to house, spoke to head of the family and ascertained who lives and included. However, Justice Kant pointed out how with technological advancement, we cannot follow 2003 procedure in 2025.
Bihar SIR controversy
The Election Commission of India’s SIR in Bihar has sparked debate ahead of the upcoming state assembly elections.
The SIR is not a political move, but a constitutional duty undertaken by the ECI to ensure that every name on the electoral roll is genuine, current and eligible. Over time, voter lists naturally accumulate inaccuracies, that is they may include names of deceased individuals, people who have migrated or duplicate entries. The SIR seeks to clean these records so that elections reflect the true will of legitimate voters.
While some have alleged deletion of around 65 lakh names, the ECI has clarified time and again that these are provisional figures subject to thorough verification, claims and objections. Moreover, the process is governed by strict legal safeguards with multiple levels of scrutiny involving booth-level officers, local hearings and appeals.
That the controversy largely stems from a trust deficit brought forward by mainstream politicians and so-called Modi-hating activists not from proven illegality. Meanwhile, the Court has directed transparency measures — such as publishing deleted names and reasons — which the ECI has welcomed as part of its commitment to accountability.
SC interim order
The Court passed an interim order today to ensure free legal aid to those persons excluded from the final voter list to file appeals against their exclusion. The bench requested the Bihar State Legal Services Authority to issue necessary communication to the District Legal Services Authorities to ensure the availability of paralegal volunteers and legal aid counsels to assist the excluded persons in filing appeals.
