West Bengal Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee on Wednesday personally appeared before the Supreme Court and strongly objected to the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls in the state, alleging that the exercise is being used primarily to delete voters’ names and is causing grave hardship to genuine citizens.
Addressing the court, Banerjee said mismatches were not limited to titles or spelling errors. She pointed out that after marriage many women adopt their husband’s surname and daughters move to their in-laws’ homes, but such routine life changes are being treated as “logical discrepancies”, leading to deletion of names. She also said poor and migrant citizens who shift residences are being unfairly affected. The Chief Minister claimed that around 58 lakh names had been deleted and that many voters were not even given a proper opportunity to appeal. Calling the process “anti-women”, she alleged that West Bengal was being selectively targeted on the eve of elections, questioning why a similar exercise was not undertaken in Assam.
Banerjee further claimed that the rushed three-month process caused severe distress, alleging deaths of voters and even Booth Level Officers during the exercise.
Responding to these concerns, Chief Justice of India Surya Kant observed that such deletions could not be justified. He said Aadhaar cards have their own limitations and that their evidentiary value in the SIR process is yet to be finally determined.
Senior advocate Shyam Divan, appearing for Banerjee, submitted that documents such as family registers, Aadhaar cards and OBC certificates were not being accepted despite court directions. He sought directions to the Election Commission of India (ECI) to upload clear reasons for every voter flagged under the “logical discrepancy” category, pointing out that notices merely state “DM – discrepancy in mapping” without explaining the actual issue.
The court noted that voters have a right to know the reasons for such action and asked the ECI to adopt a more sensitive approach, especially in cases involving minor spelling variations. The Supreme Court granted time for verification, directed that all documents must carry authorised Booth Level Officer signatures, and listed the matter for further hearing on Monday along with the ECI’s counter affidavit.
