The Supreme Court has refused to provide temporary voting privileges to individuals whose names were removed from West Bengal’s electoral rolls during a special intensive revision (SIR) process, while their appeals remain unresolved at appellate tribunals.
Trinamool Congress representative Kalyan Banerjee argued in court that around 1.6 million appeals have been submitted, and those affected should be permitted to participate in the upcoming two-phase assembly elections this month.
Chief Justice of India Surya Kant responded that such a move was not feasible, noting it would require suspending the voting rights of those involved.
Justice Joymalya Bagchi mentioned that the SIR process has generated 3.4 million appeals, citing a report from the Calcutta High Court’s Chief Justice that confirms this figure.
The Election Commission of India (ECI) has finalized the voter list for West Bengal, preventing any additions before the polls unless specifically ordered by the Supreme Court, which did not occur in this session. The state has established 19 appellate tribunals to handle approximately 2.7 million deletion cases under judicial review.
This ruling followed a petition by 13 individuals challenging the removal of their names from the voter rolls. The court deemed the petition premature and advised approaching the appellate tribunals.
The bench stated that since the petitioners, including Quaraisha Yeasmin and others, have already filed with the tribunals, their concerns are untimely. It added that allowing the plea would lead to appropriate outcomes, without commenting on its substance.
The filing claimed the ECI was removing names arbitrarily without proper procedures and that appeals were not being addressed promptly.
ECI’s counsel, senior advocate DS Naidu, indicated that between 3 and 3.4 million appeals are pending.
Petitioners’ representatives argued that the ECI failed to issue directives to judicial bodies and urged extending the deadline for finalizing electoral rolls. Their lawyer questioned the purpose of the hearing if arguments were restricted and whether appeals would be resolved in time or continually delayed.
Justice Bagchi emphasized the importance of the electoral system’s integrity, describing the right to vote in one’s birthplace as both a constitutional and emotional entitlement, integral to democratic participation in choosing a government.
However, he noted that tribunals, staffed by retired judges, should not face imposed deadlines that overburden them. He stressed that proper procedures must validate outcomes, not vice versa, and that voters should not be caught between competing constitutional entities.
With inputs from PTI
