Assam NRC controversy: The Supreme Court, during a crucial hearing on Tuesday (December 9, 2025), raised serious questions regarding the issue of illegal immigrants in Assam and the failure to conduct a Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of the electoral rolls. The court was considering a petition alleging that the Election Commission had discriminated against Assam by not implementing the SIR, despite allegations of the presence of “40 to 50 lakh illegal immigrants” in the state since 1997. The bench, headed by Chief Justice Surya Kant, observed that given Assam’s unique geographical and social circumstances, special laws and provisions are applicable to the state, which the court will consider in detail next week.
Serious Questions Raised in the Petition
The petitioner, Mrinal Kumar Choudhury, a former president of the Gauhati High Court Bar Association, asked the Supreme Court why only a “Special Revision” is being conducted in Assam, while SIR has been implemented in 12 states and Union Territories across the country, including Bihar. The petition cited a 1997 report by former Assam Governor Lieutenant General S.K. Sinha and then Home Minister Indrajit Gupta, which estimated the number of illegal immigrants at 40-50 lakhs. According to the petitioner, if the purpose of SIR is to ensure the accuracy of the electoral rolls, then on what basis is it justified to exclude Assam from this process?
Apprehensions of Demographic Change Due to Illegal Immigrants
The petition stated that a large number of illegal immigrants have been included in the electoral rolls in Assam. If the Election Commission conducts only a summary revision without SIR, these individuals will acquire voting rights in the upcoming assembly elections, which will have a profound impact on the social and political fabric of the state. The petition also mentioned that the Supreme Court itself has expressed concern about the demographic changes caused by illegal immigrants while considering Section 6A of the Citizenship Act. Therefore, without conducting SIR, the electoral rolls cannot be considered reliable and fair. Questions Raised Over Election Commission’s Decision
Senior advocate Vijay Hansaria argued that the Election Commission had announced the implementation of the Special Summary Revision (SSR) across the country on June 24, but Assam was excluded, even though the situation there is not only different from other states but also more sensitive. He stated that in a “Special Revision,” voters are not required to provide documents such as proof of citizenship, age, and residence, whereas this is mandatory in the SSR. The population growth rate in Assam is several times higher than the national average, which points to a large number of illegal immigrants. Therefore, conducting a regular revision is constitutionally and administratively inappropriate. The Supreme Court has taken this entire issue seriously and scheduled a detailed hearing for next week, which could have a significant impact on the electoral process and the transparency of the voter list in Assam.
