‘Tell your officers also to be sensitive': Supreme Court tells Election Commission over SIR in Bengal

The Supreme Court on Wednesday heard a plea by West Bengal Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee challenging the ongoing Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls in the state ahead of the Assembly elections. Addressing the bench in person, Mamata Banerjee alleged large-scale wrongful deletions of voters.

The court noted that the entire procedure is governed by a strict timeline that had already been extended by 10 days, leaving only 4 days now. “A week's time will be too late. The entire procedure has a timeline... we have extended it for 10 days... out of that, only 4 days left...after that, only 11 days left. We can't grant the luxury of 1 week,” the court said, LiveLaw reported.

What Supreme Court said:

The court, in its order, issued formal notices to the Election Commission (EC) and the chief electoral officer of West Bengal on Mamata Banerjee's plea on SIR; the next hearing is listed for 9 February. Seeking a practical resolution, the chief justice directed the state to provide, by Monday, a list of Group B officers who can be spared to assist in the exercise.

Senior advocate Shyam Divan, appearing on behalf of Mamata Banerjee, argued that brief reasons should be provided so that people understand why their names are not included in the list.

To this, the CJI said, “Yes to the extent the person should know is fine.. only thing is the mode in which they are informed. We were told that the list is not only communication, but individual notices are being given.”

When the chief minister pointed out that 58 lakh names have been deleted and “they did not have the option to appeal”, Chief Justice of India (CJI) Surya Kant asked the EC to tell the officers to be sensitive.

“Probably once officers are made available, micro observers won't be required. [to ECI] Tell your officers also to be sensitive and not issue notice to…” he said, Bar&Bench reported.

Mamata Banerjee’s counsel told the Supreme Court that in many cases, the names of persons issued notices for alleged logical discrepancies are misspelt and can be easily rectified. To this, the CJI said, “If Roy Dutta Ganguly etc are being left out.. we don't know how Tagore is pronounced.. but that does not mean Tagore is not Tagore.”

The court also suggested that a team well “conversant in Bangla” will be helpful, as it appeared to be a “local dialect mistake.”

“It is apparent in some cases,” the court said.

The chief justice further said that “on 19 January, Mr Sibal [Kapil Sibal] had explained procedural difficulties being faced by the state. Directions were then issued, today in your plea some additional issues are flagged, every problem has a solution we must ensure that solution comes and no innocent person is left out.”

“One objective is to weed out dead, then to weed out those who are disqualified... and then migrants, genuine persons must remain on the rolls,” the court said, adding, “but by virtue of this kind of mistake such bona fide persons cannot be left out.”

As the court fixed the next hearing day for Monday, it told the poll body to “please send notices carefully. You cannot put out notable authors, etc.”

(With inputs from Bar&Bench and LiveLaw)