New Bench of Supreme Court and SIR in Bihar: A Look into the Disturbing Implications

[Sukla Sen]

Reproduced below are links to two independent sets of responses from Grok and Perplexity to a common set of queries pertaining to yesterday's developments in the Supreme Court in the Bihar SIR case.

Here's the common set of queries:

A comprehensive account of the proceedings in the Supreme Court of india on July 28th in the Bihar SIR case?

The implications of letting the process go ahead unamended without any issuing any instructions?

What does issuing of (only) oral observation suggesting inclusion of Aadhaar, EPIC and ration card as admissible documents despite such suggestions issued last time having been summarily rejected portend?

Is the (pious and lofty) pronouncement that the revision exercise should result in "massive inclusion" and not "massive exclusion" -- without laying down any whatever guidelines towards ensuring that -- in the teeth of very disturbing reports that a huge number of existing voters' names, maybe anywhere between some 3.55 and 6.4 million going to serve only as a deceptive (and clever?) cover for this massive exercise designed to delete with its (i) restrictive list of enabling documents, understandably, very difficult to produce -- that too within an extremely tight timeline and (ii) so much so that so many video reports, by a veteran journalist Ajit Anjum in particular, are now there indicating large-scale deployment of fraudulent methods to meet the deadline?

__

The links:

I/II. Grok: <https://grok.com/share/c2hhcmQtMg%3D%3D_50fe7077-ebf2-48e8-8248-ba444eb95583>.

II. Perplexity: <https://www.perplexity.ai/search/a-comprehensive-account-of-the-T1VqxvjHRcOeGUXErAdteg#0>.

The "Conclusions" by the two:

AA. Grok:

• The Supreme Court’s July 28, 2025, proceedings in the Bihar SIR case highlighted critical concerns about the ECI’s restrictive document list, tight timeline, and potential for mass disenfranchisement. While the Court’s oral observations on including Aadhaar, EPIC, and ration cards and its call for “massive inclusion” reflect a commitment to protecting voting rights, their non-binding nature and lack of specific guidelines limit their impact. The ECI’s rejection of earlier suggestions and reports of fraudulent practices, such as those by Ajit Anjum, underscore the risk of significant voter deletions (potentially 3.55–6.4 million), particularly among vulnerable groups. Allowing the SIR to proceed unamended could undermine democratic principles, erode public trust, and skew the upcoming Bihar elections, with the Court’s pronouncements potentially serving as a deceptive cover unless followed by enforceable directives in the final hearing.

BB. Perplexity:

• The Supreme Court’s proceedings on July 28, 2025, underscored a tension between laudable rhetorical commitments to voter inclusion and a pragmatic judicial reluctance to intervene robustly. The oral suggestion to accept Aadhaar, EPIC, and ration cards repeats previous, unheeded suggestions, and the absence of binding guidelines or institutional oversight raises doubts about the stated objective of “massive inclusion.” In this context, the process appears vulnerable to both procedural abuse and administrative exclusion, as widely documented by independent journalists and field reports. The ultimate resolution thus hinges not only on the court’s future ruling, but the ECI’s willingness—or unwillingness—to reform practices in the intervening period.

[Also look up: 'The SIR Underway: 'Supreme Court Bench headed by Justice Dhulia to hear Bihar electoral roll revision case on July 10 [today]'' at <https://share.google/LD46Xemu9gzmAT1Nz>. for the context.]

Peace Is Doable