New Delhi, May 27 (IANS) The Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) on Wednesday strongly criticised remarks questioning the Supreme Court’s ruling on the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls, asserting that allegations accusing the apex court of abandoning its constitutional responsibilities were “reckless, irresponsible and corrosive to institutional faith”.

The reaction came after the Supreme Court upheld the decision of the Election Commission of India to undertake the SIR exercise, ruling that the revision of electoral rolls fell within the constitutional and statutory powers of the poll body and was intended to preserve the integrity of the electoral process.

Responding to criticism directed at the judgment, BJP IT cell chief Amit Malviya defended the apex court and said criticism of judicial decisions must remain within democratic and constitutional boundaries.

“It is deeply unfortunate that a litigant before the Supreme Court has chosen to respond to an unfavourable verdict by imputing motives to the highest constitutional court of the land. One may disagree with a judgment, critique its reasoning, or seek a review through lawful means — that is part of democratic discourse. But to suggest that the Court has ‘abdicated’ its responsibility or consciously enabled disenfranchisement is reckless, irresponsible, and corrosive to institutional faith,” Malviya said in a post on X.

Malviya’s remarks came in response to comments made by political activist Yogendra Yadav, one of the litigants in the matter, who criticised the Supreme Court’s verdict.

Reacting to the criticism, the BJP leader said the Supreme Court had arrived at its decision after hearing detailed submissions and arguments from all concerned parties. “The Supreme Court has upheld the constitutionality of SIR after hearing extensive arguments from all sides. To dismiss the verdict as predetermined merely because it does not align with one’s political or ideological position betrays contempt not just for the Court, but for constitutional process itself,” Malviya said.

He further accused Yadav of attempting to portray himself as the sole defender of democracy and morality while questioning the integrity of constitutional institutions.

“Even more astonishing is the attempt by the petitioner to cast himself as the lone guardian of democracy and morality. This sanctimony would perhaps be easier to take seriously if it came from someone with a record of intellectual honesty and institutional respect. Instead, it comes from a man who has repeatedly thrived on disruption, distortion and political theatrics while masquerading as an ‘activist’,” the BJP leader added.

Malviya also asserted that criticism of institutions should not cross into attempts to weaken public trust whenever decisions do not suit particular political or ideological positions. “The right to critique institutions does not extend to systematically undermining them whenever outcomes prove inconvenient,” he said.

“India’s democracy is far stronger than the cynicism of self-appointed crusaders who believe that every institution is legitimate only when it agrees with them,” the BJP leader added.

–IANS

sd/skp