WB SIR | Supreme Court Issues Directions To ECI To Ensure Transparent Verification Of Persons In 'Logical Discrepency' List
"See the strain and stress going on for the ordinary people, over 1 crore people are given notices," the Court observed.
In relation to the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) process in West Bengal, the Supreme Court on Monday issued a set of directons to the Election Commission of India(ECI) to ensure that the verification of the persons put in the 'logical discrepancies' category is conducted in a transparent manner, without causing stress and inconvenience to the persons.
The Court directed the Election Commission of India to publish the list of persons to whom notices have been sent citing "logical discrepancies" in the enumeration forms submitted by them. The lists have to be published in the Panchayat/Block offices.
The Court noted that about 1.25 crores of notices have been sent to various persons, citing discrepancies such as mismatch in parents' names, low age-gap with parents, number of progeny of the cited parents more than six etc.
The Court also clarified that persons, who have received notices from the ECI, will be entitled to submit their documents/objections through their authorised agents, who can be the Booth Level Agents (BLAs). The agents have to be appointed through a letter marked with a signature or thumb impression.
Taking into consideration the concerns expressed by the petitioners that persons will have to travel hundreds of kilometres to respond to the notices, the Court directed that the office for submitting the documents/ objections shall be set up within the Panchayat Bhavan/ Block offices. If the documents are found to be unsatisfactory, the election officers should give the persons an opportunity of hearing, which can be attended by the authorised agent.
Further, taking note of the concerns raised by the petitioners, the Court directed that the officials, on receiving the documents or on hearing the affected person, shall also certify the receipt of the documents or according of the hearing. The bench observed that such a receipt will serve as a proof that the documents have been submitted.
The Court further directed the State Government to ensure adequate manpower to the ECI for the process. The Director General of Police of West Bengal was directed to ensure that no law and order problem arises in the process.
A bench comprising Chief Justice of India Surya Kant, Justice Dipankar Datta and Justice Joymalya Bagchi passed the order while hearing petitions related to the West Bengal SIR.
Senior Advocate Kapil Sibal, appearing for certain Trinamool Congress members, submitted that many persons who have been included in the draft voters list have been served with notices of hearings, citing "logical discrepancies." Sibal said that names like "Ganguly", "Datta", etc., can be spelt in different ways, and these spelling differences are cited as reasons for notices. Sibal added that in some cases, notices are sent on the ground that the age difference with the parents is less than 15 years. He requested for the publication of the logical discrepancies, and also to allow the Booth Level Agents to assist the voters in the hearings. He submitted that the notices require the persons to travel hundreds of kilometres.
Senior Advocate Rakesh Dwivedi, for the ECI, submitted that instructions have been issued to the officers not to send notices citing spelling differences. However, cases where the age difference with the parents is 15 years or less are flagged as a "logical discrepancy".
"Why is it a logical discrepancy? How can 15 years age gap between mother and son be logical discrepancy?" asked Justice Bagchi, who pointed out that "it is not as if we don't have child marriages in the country."
Dwivedi also said that BLAs cannot insist that in every hearing, they should be allowed to represent the voters. BLAs are members of political parties, and they cannot be involved in the hearing, Dwivedi said. He clarified that a person can authorise an agent to represent him, and the agent can include a BLA, he added.
Senior Advocates Shyam Divan and Kalyan Banerjee also supplemented the arguments of Sibal. Divan alleged that instructions have been sent to Booth Level Officers through WhatsApp messages instead of formal orders and hence, there was no transparency in the process. He wondered how the age difference with parents or gradpaernts can be a relevant consideration and asked what was the statutory basis for the actions of the ECI.
Banerjee submitted that notices have been sent even to Nobel Laureate Professor Amartya Sen and sitting MPs, and alleged that a "profiling" of voters was at play.
Dwivedi refuted the allegations and exclaimed, ":if the ECI is to be distrusted, let not the ECI hold the elections at all!". Senior Advocate Dama Seshadri Naidu, who represented the ECI in a connected matter, submitted that the election officials were facing obstructions and threats in the State in performing their duties.
During the hearing, the bench stressed that the process should be transparent and not inconvenient to the voters.
"Some correction exercise can be taken, but it should be transparent," CJI Kant said.
"See the strain and stress going on for the ordinary people, over 1 crore people are given notices...do not create a third issue here, that's all we are requesting," Justice Bagchi said.
Case : MOSTARI BANU Vs THE ELECTION COMMISSION OF INDIA | W.P.(C) No. 1089/2025 and connected cases.
Also from today's hearing :