Under the special intensive revision process going on across the country, till now the names of 6 crore people have been removed from the voter list. But the real question now is about legal rights. If someone’s name is removed from the voter list, will he still be able to exercise all his rights like a common citizen? The Supreme Court has repeatedly reiterated the same thing on this question, from the Bihar SIR case to the case related to West Bengal. The court said that removal of name from the voter list only means that the person cannot vote. This does not automatically end his citizenship or other rights related to it.
During a hearing, Justice Bagchi made the court’s stand very clear. He said that our decision is clear. ECI is not an agency to decide citizenship under Articles 9, 10, 11 and 12 of the Constitution. ECI’s authority extends only to the voter list. He can add or remove someone’s name, but this does not take away anyone’s citizenship. That is, the court says that deletion of name from the voter list and loss of citizenship are two completely different things. Mere deletion of name does not make a person a “non-citizen”. In such a situation, despite deletion of name in SIR, most of your rights will not be affected.
1. Fundamental Rights
Fundamental rights like right to life and personal liberty (Article 21), freedom of movement and right to express one’s views (Article 19) do not depend on name being in the voter list. Every citizen gets these rights, whether his name is in the voter list or not. Justice Bagchi had clearly said that ECI is not an institution to decide citizenship. Therefore, mere deletion of name from the voter list does not affect these rights.
2. Right to vote
This is the only right which gets directly affected as soon as the name is deleted. Until the decision on the appeal is received, the person cannot vote in that constituency. The court has also accepted that the Election Commission has the right to prepare and update the voter list under Article 324 of the Constitution. Therefore, SIR has a direct impact only on the right to vote.
3. Right to buy property and land
The right to buy and sell land or property is linked to citizenship, not to the voter list. Voter ID is also not considered proof of citizenship. Therefore, whether the name is in the voter list or not, it does not affect the right to buy land or property. Unless the Home Ministry officially declares someone a non-citizen under the Citizenship Act, these rights remain intact. According to the court, this responsibility does not lie with the ECI but with the Home Ministry. That means, even if your name has been struck off in SIR, you can still buy land and property.
3. Passport and right to travel abroad
After SIR, many such cases came to light in which people alleged that their passport was not renewed. But the passport is issued by the Ministry of External Affairs on the basis of other documents and not on the basis of voter list. Therefore, mere deletion of name from the voter list does not directly affect anyone’s passport or right to travel abroad. In the recent hearing, senior advocate Gopal Sankaranarayanan demanded from the court that passport should be considered a valid proof of citizenship, so that people are not asked for new documents again and again. However, the court’s final decision on this is yet to come.
5. Right to government schemes
According to the legal principle, the entitlement to government schemes like ration, Annapurna is also linked to citizenship and not to the voter list. Therefore, even if someone’s name has been deleted from the SIR, he will still be entitled to schemes like ration. However, the picture is different at the ground level. A case came to light in West Bengal, where a person’s ration card was also canceled after his name was deleted from the SIR. The Supreme Court issued notice to ECI and West Bengal government in this matter. That is, the court has clarified the legal principle, but has also stated the need to give separate instructions to implement it properly. This legal principle has not yet been fully implemented on the ground in schemes like ration, Annapurna and caste certificate. For this reason, the court has to intervene again and again on different petitions. This dispute may increase further in the coming months amidst 34 lakh pending appeals.
Leave a Reply