CLAT-2027 Blog

SC Reserves Verdict on Special Intensive Revision: Article 326, ECI’s Power & the Bihar Rolls Battle

CURRENT AFFAIRS | 27 MAY 2026

The Supreme Court bench led by CJI Surya Kant and Justice Joymalya Bagchi has reserved its verdict on a clutch of petitions challenging the constitutional validity of the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls in Bihar. With the verdict expected today, the case sits at the intersection of Article 326 (universal adult suffrage), the Representation of the People Acts and the ECI’s power to scrutinise citizenship while purging rolls. For CLAT 2027, this is a textbook current-affairs-to-polity bridge.

Constitutional Framework

  • Article 324: Vests superintendence, direction and control of elections in the ECI.
  • Article 326: Mandates elections on the basis of adult suffrage — every citizen above 18.
  • Article 327: Empowers Parliament to legislate on electoral rolls and conduct of elections.
  • RP Act, 1950 (Section 16): Lists disqualifications for registration in an electoral roll, including non-citizenship.
  • Article 11: Reserves citizenship determination exclusively to Parliament — the petitioners’ core ground.

Key Facts

Bench CJI Surya Kant + Justice Joymalya Bagchi
Verdict reserved on 29 January 2026
Lead petitioner Association for Democratic Reforms (ADR)
Co-petitioners Mahua Moitra (TMC), Manoj Jha (RJD), K C Venugopal (INC), Supriya Sule (NCP-SP)
ECI defence Art. 326 imposes a duty to ensure only citizens vote

CLAT Angle

Expect Legal Reasoning passages on federal limits of ECI power, GK on the SIR notification timeline, and questions on Article 326 vs Article 11 overlap. The case may also generate a Reading Comprehension passage on the Bihar floods context, since petitioners argued the exercise was carried out in haste leading to disenfranchisement of minorities.

Memory Hook

“3-2-6 = Adult Suffrage; 3-2-4 = ECI Boss” — Article 326 grounds the vote, Article 324 grounds the regulator. ECI defends the SIR under 326; petitioners say it strays into Article 11 (citizenship) — a Union-Parliament domain.

Want structured CLAT preparation? Try our free 5-day Bodh Demo Course with live classes and expert guidance. Start Free →

Why CLAT Matters

The SIR verdict will reshape how India treats the silent stage of democracy — the electoral roll itself. A ruling that limits ECI’s power to adjudicate citizenship would tighten the federal balance and rewrite manuals for every future revision. CLAT 2027 will almost certainly carry a passage from this judgement: be ready to identify the ratio, the obiter, and the doctrinal interplay between Articles 324, 326 and 11.

Practice Quiz — 10 CLAT-Style Questions

Click an option to reveal the answer and explanation.

Quick answers

Which Article of the Constitution embodies the principle of Universal Adult Suffrage cited by ECI to justify SIR?
Article 326. Article 326 mandates that elections to Lok Sabha and State Legislative Assemblies shall be on the basis of adult suffrage, i.e., every citizen above 18 years.
Under which statutory provision is the preparation of electoral rolls undertaken?
Section 16 of RP Act 1950. Section 16 of the Representation of the People Act, 1950 deals with disqualifications for registration in an electoral roll, including non-citizenship.
The SIR (Special Intensive Revision) petition was reserved by a bench led by which CJI?
CJI Surya Kant. As per the petition record, CJI Surya Kant along with Justice Joymalya Bagchi reserved the verdict on 29 January 2026.
The Association for Democratic Reforms (ADR) is best known for which area of advocacy?
Electoral transparency and reforms. ADR has been a leading petitioner on electoral transparency, candidate disclosure (PUCL v UoI 2003), and electoral bonds (2024).
Article 324 of the Constitution vests superintendence of elections in which body?
The Election Commission of India. Article 324 vests in the ECI the superintendence, direction and control of preparation of electoral rolls and conduct of elections.
Which case first held that the right to vote is a statutory right, not a fundamental right?
N P Ponnuswami v Returning Officer. N P Ponnuswami v Returning Officer (1952) held that the right to vote is a statutory right under the RP Act, not a fundamental right.
Share this article
CLAT Gurukul
Written by CLAT Gurukul

Ready to Crack CLAT?

This article covers just one topic. Our courses cover the entire CLAT syllabus with 500+ hours of live classes, 10,000+ practice questions, and personal mentorship from top faculty.

500+Hours of Classes
10,000+Practice Questions
50+Mock Tests
Start your CLAT prep with a free 5-day demo course Start Free Trial →