‘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 linked to the ongoing Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls in the state ahead of the elections. Mamata Banerjee, who personally addressed the Supreme Court bench, has alleged large-scale wrongful deletions of voters ahead of Assembly elections.

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

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 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 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 January 19, 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 them 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 bonafide 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)