Today, On 4th February, TMC’s Mamata Banerjee told the Supreme Court during the SIR controversy, stressing that officials faced harassment leading to suicides, saying those responsible excluded people deliberately and questioned, “West Bengal is targeted?” in this critical plea.
West Bengal Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee appeared before the Supreme Court of India on Wednesday to challenge the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls currently taking place in the state ahead of the 2026 Assembly elections.
A bench led by Chief Justice Surya Kant, along with Justices Joymalya Bagchi and Vipul Pancholi, issued a notice regarding her petition and other related pleas about the SIR.
The case is scheduled for further hearing on Monday, allowing the Election Commission of India (ECI) time to submit its response.
During the proceedings, Chief Minister Banerjee sought permission to appear and argue her case personally. It’s noteworthy that she holds a law degree from Jogesh Chandra Choudhury College of Law, Calcutta, and last practiced law in 2003.
Senior Advocate Shyam Divan, representing another petitioner, highlighted that over 1.4 crore people had received notices to produce documents.
He stressed that, despite the court’s previous directive, the logical discrepancy list had not been adequately displayed.
Divan raised concerns about the numerous pending applications and hearings, claiming there was insufficient time to complete the process.
He also argued that voters were being flagged for discrepancies in name mapping without any individual notification regarding the reasons.
In response, the Chief Justice remarked that individuals must be informed about why their names have been flagged and expressed agreement with this requirement.
The bench noted that besides the discrepancy list, individual notices were also being issued, as confirmed by counsel for the ECI. Divan requested that the ECI withdraw notices related solely to name mismatches.
ALSO READ: BREAKING: CM Mamata Banerjee Arrives At Supreme Court for West Bengal SIR Case Hearing
The Chief Justice mentioned that many discrepancies seemed to stem from regional dialect differences rather than actual mismatches, similar to issues seen in Haryana and other states.
Divan proposed that withdrawing such notices would be a suitable resolution, especially given the limited time left to complete the exercise.
Senior Advocate Kapil Sibal chimed in to remind the court of the ECI’s earlier assurances that such discrepancies would not be acted upon.
When Banerjee began her argument, she claimed that the SIR was effectively a process of deletion rather than addition. She explained that individuals often change residences due to marriage or employment, and that women frequently alter their names after marriage, leading to mismatches in identity documents.
Additionally, Banerjee alleged that the ECI was unfairly targeting opposition-led states like West Bengal ahead of elections. She criticized the compression of a process that should require two years into just three months, asserting that over 100 booth-level officers had died during the process. Banerjee also claimed that necessary documents, such as domicile certificates, were not being accepted and that micro observers were being allowed to delete names without giving aggrieved individuals a chance to be heard.
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.”
The Chief Justice interjected, stating that the court recognized Banerjee’s grievances but reassured her that counsel in related petitions were thoroughly addressing the issues.
On the topic of Aadhaar, the Chief Justice noted he could not comment as a judgment on the validity of the SIR had already been reserved, mentioning that Aadhaar itself has limitations. To address voter deletion issues stemming from name mismatches, he suggested forming a team of state officers fluent in local languages to work with the ECI.
Rakesh Dwivedi, representing the ECI, mentioned that the Commission had repeatedly requested the state to appoint Class II officers as electoral registration officers, but only 80 had been designated, leading to the hiring of micro observers.
Solicitor General Tushar Mehta informed the court that the ECI had filed an affidavit in one matter and sought its listing, expressing concerns about an atmosphere of hostility towards its officials.
Banerjee countered this, stating that the state government was cooperating and had provided all requested resources, including officers.
The court took note of these submissions, issuing notices in the petitions by Dola Sen, Mamata Banerjee, and others, scheduling the case for further consideration on Monday, February 9, 2026.
In her petition filed on January 28, CM Mamata Banerjee challenged various directives from the Election Commission and requested that the 2026 West Bengal Assembly elections be conducted based on the existing electoral rolls. She is also seeking protections for voters facing name or spelling discrepancies during the ongoing SIR process.
Importantly, the Supreme Court is already reviewing multiple petitions questioning the legality and execution of the SIR process in West Bengal amid claims of arbitrariness and widespread voter exclusion.
Earlier in January, the court had issued directives to ensure transparency and fairness in the SIR process following concerns raised by multiple petitions about inconvenience and arbitrariness in voter verification.
Case Title: Dola Sen vs Election Commission of India and Anr, Mamata Banerjee vs Election Commission of India and Another with connected matters
FOLLOW US FOR MORE LEGAL UPDATES ON YOUTUBE
