Are you from India? 🇮🇳
👉 Check Today's Deals on Amazon IndiaSupreme Court Raises Concerns Over West Bengal’s Electoral Roll Revision
NEW DELHI: On Monday, the Supreme Court of India expressed apprehensions regarding the ongoing Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls in West Bengal. Justice Joymalya Bagchi emphasized the necessity for a “robust appellate mechanism” to rectify wrongful deletions, even as the court chose not to intervene in individual cases.
Petitions Heard by Chief Justice Surya Kant’s Bench
A bench led by Chief Justice Surya Kant was reviewing petitions from voters whose names had been removed from the electoral rolls and whose appeals are still pending with appellate tribunals.
Concerns Over ‘Margin of Error’ During Large-Scale Exercise
Justice Bagchi highlighted the extensive nature of the SIR process, pointing out the immense pressure on judicial officers responsible for handling over 1,000 documents daily. He stated, “If the accuracy is 70 percent then this activity should be rated as excellent… there will always be a margin of error,” according to Live Law.
He cautioned that such errors could significantly affect electoral outcomes, especially in closely contested elections, remarking, “if a significant percentage of voters are excluded, we would definitely need to reconsider our stance.” Justice Bagchi asserted that the “right to vote” is both a constitutional entitlement and a matter of sentiment.
The judge also referenced the Bihar SIR proceedings, questioning the Election Commission’s earlier stance that voters listed in the 2002 electoral roll wouldn’t need to submit additional documents. He noted discrepancies in West Bengal’s approach, saying, “Please see your written submissions in the Bihar case… you had said the 2002 electorate need not give documents,” suggesting that the poll body seemed to be “improvising” its position.
Moreover, he drew attention to a new ‘logical discrepancy’ category in West Bengal that is not present in other states, raising alarms about inconsistencies in the revision process and its potential detriment to voters.
Court Refuses to Grant Relief, Directs Petitioners to Tribunals
Despite expressing these concerns, the bench chose not to extend the April 9 deadline for freezing the electoral rolls and declined the plea for intervention. Chief Justice Surya Kant stated, “We will not entertain this. Better you pursue there (before AT),” emphasizing that appellate tribunals are responsible for deciding these matters.
The court also warned against undermining the integrity of judicial officers, with the Chief Justice commending their efforts. Petitioners argued they were valid voters listed in the 2002 rolls and possessed documents such as Aadhaar and passports, yet their appeals were not being promptly addressed.
During the proceedings, the court stressed the importance of avoiding a “blame game” between the state and the Election Commission. Justice Bagchi noted that the voter was being “sandwiched between two Constitutional authorities” and urged appellate tribunals to adopt a “principle of inclusion” in their rulings.
Massive Electoral Roll Exercise Ahead of Elections
The SIR process, aimed at preparing for the West Bengal Assembly elections, has already resulted in the removal of over 27 lakh names after adjudication. Nineteen tribunals have been established to handle more than one lakh appeals each, showcasing the scale of this significant task.
The court also acknowledged that up to 25–35 lakh appeals may require adjudication, highlighting the logistical challenges faced by the tribunals and the urgency of ensuring due process in this time-sensitive electoral process.
In concluding the plea, the court clarified that if petitioners achieve success before the tribunals, “necessary consequences shall follow,” while keeping the option for appeal available.
Source link
