West Bengal CM Mamata Banerjee personally argued before the Supreme Court, alleging that the SIR of electoral rolls is being misused to target Bengal and harass genuine voters. The top court stressed that “genuine persons must remain on the electoral rolls” and sought responses from the Election Commission.
Today, On 4th February, WB CM Mamata Banerjee told the Supreme Court in the SIR case that the Election Commission is a “WhatsApp Commission” targeting Bengal before the polls, urging the Court to save democracy as she alleged bias in voter list actions while the CJI suggested a way forward.
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.
Today, On 4th February, West Bengal Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee arrived at the Supreme Court on Wednesday amid a growing controversy over the Special Intensive Revision of electoral rolls in the poll-bound state. The court is scheduled to hear the SIR matter.
West Bengal Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee has moved the Supreme Court against the Election Commission, questioning the Special Intensive Revision of electoral rolls in the state. She has alleged legal violations, public hardship, and serious humanitarian concerns during the SIR process.
The Supreme Court heard petitions challenging the Special Intensive Revision of Bihar’s electoral rolls, raising concerns about de novo preparation of voter lists and citizenship checks. Petitioners argued the process is arbitrary, excludes voters, and exceeds the Election Commission’s statutory powers.
During the Supreme Court hearing on women’s reservation in Punjab and Haryana Bar Council elections, CJI Surya Kant emphasized his impartiality. He stated he did not want anyone to perceive that he was favoring his home state.
Today, On 18th December, Supreme Court continues hearing the SIR validity case across states. The apex Court directs the Election Commission of India to decide the proposal within timeline, stating “Take A Decision On Or Before 31 December And Apprise The Court”.
The Election Commission told the Supreme Court that Aadhaar cannot be used as proof of citizenship and can only serve as proof of identity. The ECI clarified this position during the ongoing Special Intensive Revision process Phase 2.
The Supreme Court observed that reservation for persons with disability is essentially a policy issue and directed the Bar Council of India to consider the petitioner’s plea in view of constitutional equality principles and relevant legislative provisions for advocates with disabilities.
