The Supreme Court, while hearing various States' Special Intensive Revision ('SIR') related matters, clarified that directions concerning the security of Booth Level Officers (BLOs) will be applicable pan-India.

The Court, hearing challenges related to electoral roll revisions across multiple states, today issued significant directions on the security of ground-level electoral staff and addressed specific concerns raised in West Bengal, Assam, and Kerala.

The bench of Chief Justice Surya Kant and Justice Joymalya Bagchi clarified that the directions given regarding the protection and management of BLOs in the pleas challenging the electoral roll revisions will apply on a pan-India basis, underscoring the seriousness of maintaining security for electoral staff everywhere. The bench will hear the ongoing SIR of electoral rolls in Kerala on December 18, 2025.



West Bengal

Counsel for the Petitioner submitted, "What we have challenged is the state of violence; action has to be taken by ECI to protect the BLOs."

“Our worry is that political people are coming here as they that this platform is giving them highlights.”, CJI Kant said.

J Bagchi remarks, "Apart from a single FIR, there is no instance; there is mention of historical references. The ECI has only 1 FIR; apart from that, no FIR."

Senior Advocate Dwivedi appeared for ECI and submitted, "The police are in the hands of the State."

To which the CJI Kant remarked, "To protect the BLO, it has to be on you or the Union.

Senior Advocate Dwivedi replied, "To protect them, the state has to cooperate and give us the protection. The State has to trust us, otherwise, we have to get the Central Forces."

“If there is a threat, if there is some kind of violence, if anything is appearing. You can’t allow people to do that.”, CJI Kant observed.

Justice Bagchi said, “This is not deskwork, the BLO has to go to the house, each house and verify, and then the enumeration form is submitted, and then he uploads. So if it does the desk work of uploading, then it's one thing, but here he has to go verifying house to house. So pressure is there.”

CJI Kant added, “We are only concerned about two things, one, that we have passed an order directing the states to relieve those persons who are having health issues and replace them, of course, additional manpower is required, and the election commission and this government are obligated to provide that also. The third issue is when BLO perform at the ground level, there is a threat by the local people.”

Justice Bagchi further said, “We are sympathetic to your cause, but we are also trying to find out whether there is a narrative? Through forensic evidence, we find obstruction only in one FIR. Should directions be passed only in WB? This is a unique instance in WB only? Any lack of cooperation by any state government is a liberty to intimidate us, and we will pass directions…”

CJI Kant remarked, "Instead of you coming, someone else is coming; we cannot believe that there is an isolation incident... This will become a serious issue if BLOs are not getting security."


Kerala

The Bench, hearing a challenge to the electoral roll notification in Kerala, was informed by the Senior Advocate Rakesh Dwivedi for the Election Commission of India (ECI) that the deadline for submitting enumeration forms has been extended until December 18th. The ECI also stated that over 97.4% of the submitted forms have already been digitized and uploaded. Despite this extension, one counsel requested an additional two weeks, arguing that college students returning for vacations need more time, a request that the Chief Justice did not grant, noting that the deadline had already been extended to the next week (December 18th).

The Court ordered, "Counsel for the EC Rakesh Dwivedi submitted that time has been extended in the State of Kerala in the submission of enumeration forms by December 18, 2025. It is submitted that more than 97.4% forms have been digitised and uploaded. Counsel for the Petitioner submits that 20 lacs enumeration forms are yet to be returned, the timeline may be extended by another 2 days...post the matter on 18th."

Previously, the Court permitted the State of Kerala to submit a proposal to the ECI for extension of the last date of submission of the SIR enumeration form and asked ECI to consider it sympathetically.

The Court had previously issued notice to the Election Commission of India in the petition filed by the Government of Kerala seeking to postpone the Special Intensive Revision (‘SIR’) of the electoral rolls in Kerala until the elections of the local body are completed.


Assam

The Supreme Court issued notice to the Election Commission of India (ECI) in a petition challenging the ECI's decision to perform only a 'Special Revision' of the electoral roll in Assam, rather than the more thorough 'Special Intensive Revision' (SIR), ahead of the 2026 Assembly elections. The petitioner argued that the less rigorous revision risks the inclusion of ineligible voters and is arbitrary, given the ground realities in Assam.

Senior Advocate Vijay Hansaria appeared on behalf of the Petitioner, said, "Assam has been singled out and the ECI has not said anything on the record."

Chief Justice Kant remarked, "All the SIR matters are ordered to be segregated as per the previous directions, the Registry is directed to comply…If we feel that something with the representation can be rectified, we will allow it...If we express an opinion in the Bihar matter, it will have repercussions in TN, Kerala, WB...we will have to take a call, we will continue hearing."

Background

The Court had sought separate responses of the Election Commission (EC) on pleas filed by DMK, CPI(M), West Bengal Congress and Trinamool Congress leaders challenging the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of the electoral rolls in Tamil Nadu and West Bengal, respectively.

The Bench, on November 11, agreed to hear pleas challenging the Election Commission’s decision to conduct a pan-India Special Intensive Revision of electoral rolls.

On October 16, the EC termed the Bihar SIR "accurate" and told the Apex Court that the petitioner political parties and NGOs are merely content with making "false allegations" to discredit the exercise. The poll body also told the Apex Court that not a single appeal has been filed by any voter against name deletion since the publication of the final electoral roll. It denied the allegation of the petitioners that there was a "disproportionate exclusion of Muslims" from the final electoral roll of the state prepared after the months-long SIR exercise.

On September 30, the EC, while publishing the final electoral list of the poll-bound Bihar, said the total number of electors has come down by nearly 47 lakh to 7.42 crore in the final electoral roll from 7.89 crore before SIR.


Cause Title: P.K. Kunhalikutty v. Election Commission Of India And Anr. [W.P.(C) No. 1133/2025], Mrinal Kumar Choudhary v. Election Commission Of India [W.P.(C) No. 1191/2025] and various others.

CJI Surya KantJustice Joymalya BagchiElection Commission

Aastha Kaushik