The Supreme Court observed that Mamata Banerjee and All India Trinamool Congress leaders may pursue fresh legal action over West Bengal election results where victory margins were allegedly lower than voters removed during the controversial electoral roll revision exercise.
The Supreme Court observed that Mamata Banerjee and other leaders of the All India Trinamool Congress (AITC) may initiate fresh legal action regarding election outcomes in constituencies where the margin of victory was allegedly smaller than the number of voters reportedly removed during the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls.
The comment was made while the court heard petitions linked to the extended controversy over the Election Commission’s voter-roll revision exercise in West Bengal. The SIR exercise triggered intense political debate before the State Assembly elections, and later became a key issue in the Trinamool Congress’s claims of electoral manipulation after it lost the election to the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP).
Representing Banerjee and the other petitioners, senior counsel argued that in at least 31 Assembly constituencies, the number of voters allegedly deleted or excluded through the SIR exercise exceeded the final margin by which the winning candidate prevailed. The petitioners submitted that this pattern raised concerns about the fairness of the revision process and its potential effect on the election results.
The Election Commission opposed these submissions, arguing that disputes involving election results could be raised only through election petitions after the results are declared. It further contended that constitutional challenges to the SIR exercise cannot be used as a direct route to question the outcome of elections.
Without making any final remarks on the allegations, the Supreme Court indicated that candidates or political parties who believe they were adversely affected could seek remedies under election law, including by filing fresh applications.
The SIR exercise became one of the most divisive political issues in West Bengal ahead of the Assembly elections. The Trinamool Congress repeatedly accused the Election Commission of carrying out what it called “targeted deletions” of voters while purportedly cleaning the electoral rolls.
At the peak of the controversy earlier this year, Mamata Banerjee personally appeared before the Supreme Court an uncommon step for a serving chief minister to challenge the revision process. During the hearing, she argued that the exercise was “not for inclusion but deletion.”
Banerjee claimed that a large number of legitimate voters, including women, migrant workers, and persons belonging to minority communities, were being unfairly removed from electoral rolls due to spelling differences, address mismatches, and other “logical discrepancies” in voter records. The Trinamool Congress also alleged that the revision disproportionately affected areas viewed as its electoral strongholds.
Earlier, the Supreme Court had also expressed concern about the scale of deletions reported during the SIR exercise and sought clarification on the safeguards the Election Commission employed while revising the rolls.
The Election Commission, however, consistently defended the exercise, stating that the revision was required to remove duplicate, shifted, and otherwise ineligible voters from the electoral database. It also argued that adequate procedural safeguards and appellate avenues were available to individuals whose names were removed.
The legal dispute over the SIR exercise continues to be politically sensitive in West Bengal, with the Trinamool Congress continuing to maintain that the voter deletions may have had a material impact on results in several closely fought constituencies.
FOLLOW US ON YOUTUBE FOR MORE LEGAL UPDATES