Today, On 4th February, The Supreme Court told the Election Commission of India to issue name discrepancy notices carefully during Mamata Banerjee’s plea against the West Bengal SIR. Banerjee said the state was being targeted and delivered an emotional statement in court.
The Supreme Court reviewed petitions that contest the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls overseen by the Election Commission of India (ECI) in several states.
Significantly, Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee may present her arguments in the petitions concerning the SIR in West Bengal. She has filed an interlocutory application requesting permission to appear and argue personally and is at the Supreme Court accompanied by her legal team.
A Bench comprising Chief Justice of India (CJI) Surya Kant, Justices Joymalya Bagchi, and Vipul Pancholi is addressing this issue.
They remarked,
“Please send notices carefully. You cannot put out notable authors etc.”
In representation for poet Joy Goswami, Senior Advocate Shyam Divan criticized the court’s order requiring the ECI to display names on the voter list with discrepancies in logic.
CJI Kant added,
“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 communicated, but individual notices are being given.”
Divan subsequently requested the court to instruct the ECI to withdraw all notices related solely to name mismatches.
CJI Kant responded,
“Suppose one person writes Dutta and some may spell it as Datta…”
Justice Bagchi noted,
“Same with Bandhopadhyay.”
When CJI Kant remarked that asking the ECI to retract the notices would be unreasonable, Divan highlighted that around 70 lakh discrepancies flagged are due to name mismatches.
Addressing the ECI’s counsel, Senior Advocate Rakesh Dwivedi, CJI Kant remarked,
“Some discrepancy is due to how you speak in local dialect…such things happen pan India.”
Justice Bagchi added,
“Mr Dwivedi, in Bengal you will be called Mr Dibedi. Bengali language does not have a ‘va.'”
When CJI Kant mentioned that his name would be pronounced correctly in Bengal, Chief Minister Banerjee interjected,
“No it will not, Sir.”
The CJI proposed that the state provide a team to assist the Commission in identifying errors caused by local dialect differences.
CM Banerjee replied,
“I belong to that State. I am very grateful because of your kindness. When justice is crying behind the door…then we thought we are not getting justice anywhere. We wrote 6 letters to the Election Commission. I am a bonded labourer…I prefer that, I am not fighting for my party.”
CJI Kant then stated,
“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 genuine migrants must remain on the rolls…but by virtue of this kind of mistake, such bona fide persons cannot be left out…the entire procedure has a timeline. We had extended it for 10 days and now only 4 days are left. We cannot grant you the luxury of one week…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 CM countered,
“I am giving you the example. I can show you the photos. It is not my photograph…it is by leading newspapers. The SIR process is only for deletion…suppose a daughter after marriage goes to her in-laws’ house…questions arise about why she is using her husband’s title, etc…sometimes, poor people buy a flat, sometimes they shift…but all are deleted. They (the ECI) violated your order and falsely claimed it is an incorrect mapping.”
She added that the ECI is demanding additional certifications alongside Aadhaar, which is not required in other states.
She stated,
“They only targeted West Bengal on the eve of elections, wanting to accomplish in 2 months what generally takes 2 years,”
She further added,
“When people are excluded, they did it. BLOs committed suicide, and they blamed the election officials due to harassment. West Bengal is targeted; why not Assam?”
CJI Kant replied regarding Aadhaar,
“SIR validity issue we have reserved judgment on, and thus we cannot comment on the issue. Aadhaar card also has its own limitations. Now, regarding the discrepancies, provide a team of officers and let the Election Commission take them to verify and see how names are mismatched. Let us give them one day.”
Banerjee objected, asserting,
“ERO has no role now…Micro observers have been appointed from BJP-ruled states to delete the names. 58 lakhs were deleted in the first phase…so many were reported dead…This Election Commission, sorry, WhatsApp Commission, is orchestrating all of this.”
Dwivedi retorted, claiming,
“We wrote several times to the state to appoint Class 2 officers as EROs. Only 80 were provided…The fault lies with them, which is why we appointed micro observers.”
The CM further stated,
“We have 23 districts. The SDM is district-dependent. We have provided all Class 2 officers. They are stating things I find unbelievable. In the second phase, 1.30 crore voters have been left out. They targeted West Bengal with micro observers to intimidate the populace. The logical discrepancy list cannot be disregarded; this is my submission.”
Solicitor General Tushar Mehta informed the court that ECI officials are facing hostility.
The court eventually issued notices in both petitions, scheduling the matter for hearing again on Monday, February 9.
As the session concluded, CM Banerjee urged the court,
“Please protect the people’s rights. We are grateful.”
Last year, the ECI conducted an SIR in Bihar ahead of the state assembly elections, leading to multiple petitions, including those from the Association for Democratic Reforms (ADR) and the National Federation for Indian Women (NFIW), challenging its legality. Nonetheless, the ECI proceeded with the SIR in Bihar since the Supreme Court did not impose any stay.
Following this, the ECI extended the SIR to other states and Union Territories, including West Bengal, Kerala, and Tamil Nadu, on October 27, 2025, prompting additional petitions against this move. The court reserved its decision on these cases on January 29.
Banerjee then approached the court, contesting the ECI’s decision to execute a SIR in the state and requested that the polls utilize the electoral rolls prepared the previous year.
She also sought an urgent order to stop the deletion of voters, particularly those in the “Logical Discrepancy” category from the rolls. In her petition, Banerjee expressed concern over an immediate and irreversible threat of mass disenfranchisement of eligible voters in the upcoming state assembly elections, which she argued could disrupt the fairness of the electoral process.
Her plea states,
“The Petitioner reasonably apprehends that elections to the Legislative Assembly of West Bengal will be immediately declared thereafter as the term of Assembly comes to an end on or about 07.05.2026. This is the ultimate act of injustice as it will practically freeze the voters list for West Bengal, causing large-scale disenfranchisement and errors resulting from the opaque, hasty, unconstitutional, and illegal actions of the ECI, as described herein, without adequate time for grievance redressal,”
While challenging the entire SIR process, she also requested that name mismatches or spelling discrepancies in the ‘logical discrepancy’ category not be brought to hearing during this process and that all corrections be made proactively based on existing records.
Additionally, she insisted that all identification documents issued by competent authorities must be accepted.
She further alleged that despite the Supreme Court’s clear orders against it in petitions challenging the SIR, electoral officers continue to receive instructions via WhatsApp. Moreover, she asserted that the list of individuals classified under ‘logical discrepancy’ has not been made available online.
Banerjee has contended,
“The entire SIR exercise is an effort to disenfranchise existing voters in the Electoral Roll by compelling them to prove their citizenship with ‘documentary’ evidence, imposed against an arbitrary cut-off date of 2002. This violates the Constitution and the Representation of the People Acts of 1950 and 1951,”
Before the hearing on the SIR, West Bengal Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee filed an interlocutory application in the Supreme Court, requesting permission to appear and present her arguments personally.
Banerjee had previously submitted a petition under Article 32 challenging the SIR process. Among other requests, she is seeking guidance to ensure that the 2026 West Bengal Assembly elections are held based on the current electoral rolls rather than those that will be revised following the SIR.
Additionally, she has requested urgent instructions to prevent the removal of voters from the electoral rolls.