Supreme Court judge Ujjal Bhuyan revisited the colonial-era limited franchise to argue that universal adult suffrage was won through the freedom struggle, in remarks made amid the SIR controversy.

BulletsIn

• On October 4, 2026, Supreme Court judge Justice Ujjal Bhuyan spoke at the valedictory of the 19th NALSAR-Justice B.R. Sawhney Memorial Moot Court Competition in Hyderabad.
• He said the restrictions under the Government of India Act, 1935 were considered arbitrary and retrograde.
• He added that this limited franchise fuelled the country's desire for full and universal adult suffrage.
• The 1919 and 1935 Government of India Acts restricted the vote to those meeting qualifications relating to property, income or education.
• One account puts the 1935 Act's expansion of the electorate at about 14 per cent of the population, up from about 3 per cent, though estimates vary across sources.
• Demands for universal franchise appeared early, beginning with the Constitution of India Bill, 1895.
• The Indian National Congress's Karachi Resolution of 1931 resolved that any future constitution must rest on adult suffrage.
• Justice Bhuyan said the right to vote is intertwined with India's long struggle against foreign rule and represents the freedom achieved through that struggle.
• He noted that the initial draft Constitution did not contain draft Articles 289A and 289B, which abolished separate electorates and provided for adult suffrage.
• The commitment to adult franchise was settled in the Constituent Assembly and is enshrined in Article 326.
• He said Article 326 cannot be tinkered with at all.
• He did not explicitly mention the Election Commission's Special Intensive Revision, but his remarks came amid the controversy over exclusion of voters from the rolls.