SC flags concerns over voter exclusion in West Bengal SIR, calls for robust appellate mechanism

The Supreme Court on Monday observed that if a candidate wins by a margin of 2% and 15% of voters are unable to vote due to their exclusion from the electoral rolls, it would be a matter of concern and may require closer scrutiny. The Court also noted that voters in West Bengal appeared to be “sandwiched” between two constitutional authorities—the State government and the Election Commission of India (ECI)—due to a “trust deficit.”

A Bench comprising Chief Justice Surya Kant and Justice Joymalya Bagchi was hearing pleas arising out of the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls in West Bengal and the functioning of the Appellate Tribunals, which are tasked with deciding over 34 lakh appeals, with the first phase of polling scheduled for next week.

Advertisement

Justice Bagchi underlined that the Court’s primary concern was to ensure the inclusion of eligible voters while maintaining the purity of the electoral process. “The fundamental right of a citizen to be on the electoral roll and the duty of the Election Commission must be balanced,” he observed.

Highlighting the potential impact on electoral outcomes, Justice Bagchi said, “If 10% of the electorate does not vote and the winning margin is more than 10%… what will happen? Suppose the margin is 2% and 15% of the electorate who are mapped could not vote—then maybe, we are not expressing any opinion, but we would definitely have to apply our minds.”

The Court also took note of deviations in the conduct of the SIR in West Bengal as compared to other states, particularly Bihar. Justice Bagchi pointed out that the introduction of a “logical discrepancy” category—affecting over 60 lakh voters—was unique to West Bengal. “Logical discrepancy was not a category in any other state except West Bengal,” he said.

Referring to the stand taken by the ECI in the Bihar SIR proceedings, the Bench observed that persons already included in the 2002 electoral rolls were not required to furnish documents. “You are deviating from your unequivocal statement… go through your written submissions in Bihar SIR,” Justice Bagchi told the poll body.

The Court also emphasised procedural fairness, noting that reasons must be recorded when a voter’s inclusion is questioned. “The entire process has to be reasonable and fair,” the Bench said, referring to the statutory framework under the Representation of the People Act and relevant rules.

Addressing the large volume of cases handled during the SIR, Justice Bagchi said judicial officers could not be expected to maintain perfect accuracy under pressure. “If a person is dealing with over 1,000 documents a day… even 70% accuracy would be rated as excellent,” he remarked, adding that errors were inevitable and required correction through appellate forums.

Stressing the need for safeguards, the Court said a “robust appellate mechanism” was essential. “We need a robust system… The effort of the Court is to enable a person to be included in the electoral roll,” Justice Bagchi said.

He further noted that the situation reflected a deeper institutional issue. “It is a situation of voters being sandwiched between two constitutional authorities,” he said, pointing to the ongoing friction between the State government and the ECI.

The Court, however, declined to interfere at this stage, asking the petitioners to pursue their remedies before the appellate tribunals.

In the meantime, the Court asked the National Investigation Agency (NIA) to ascertain the political background of the accused arrested in connection with the gherao of seven judicial officers, including three women judges engaged in the SIR exercise, on April 1, 2026, in Malda district of West Bengal.