Extend West Bengal SIR deadline by ‘at least’ 1 week: Supreme Court directs Election Commission

NEw new delhi : The sublime margaret court on mon directed the Election charge of India (ECI) to extend “by at least one week” the February 14 deadline for publication of the final electoral rolls in West Bengal, while seeking a personal affidavit from the state’s director general of Police (DGP) in response to the poll panel’s claim that its officials conducting the special intensive revision (SIR) were facing serious threats to their safety and that a concerted attempt, with the “complicity of all key actors of the State”, was being made to derail the process.A bench comprising Chief Justice of India Surya Kant and justices Joymalya Bagchi and NV Anjaria said that the additional time was being granted to “streamline the process”, allow proper scrutiny of claims and objections raised by voters, and to address apprehensions expressed by petitioners, including West Bengal chief minister Mamata Banerjee.Also read: Supreme Court asks Gujarat pollution body to decide pharma firm plea in 1 week“Since the process of scrutinising documents submitted by affected persons in response to notices is likely to take more time, and as suggested on behalf of some of the petitioners, we direct that at least one week more time -- beyond February 14, will be granted to EROs for completing scrutiny of documents and taking apt decisions,” the bench said in its order.At the same time, the court took judicial notice of serious allegations made by ECI in two recent affidavits, alleging that amid zero cooperation from the local police, election officials engaged in the SIR process in West Bengal had faced violence, intimidation and obstruction, forcing some to withdraw from duty after violent incidents at hearing venues.The poll body also accused the chief minister, and various other TMC leaders of making provocative speeches, disseminating misleading information about the SIR exercise, overtly targeting election officials and seeking to create fear among voters.In view of these allegations, the court directed the West Bengal DGP to file a personal affidavit responding to ECI’s averments, recalling its January 19 order that had made the DGP personally accountable for maintaining law and order during the revision exercise.Also read: SC refuses to hear Kuldeep Sengar's bail plea in Unnao rape caseThe top court also clarified that controversial micro-observers – during her submissions before the court last week, Banerjee had strongly protested against these appointments – would only assist EROs and AEROs, with final decision-making authority resting solely with the statutory officers.Bengal, where roughly 5.8 million names were dropped from the draft roll published last year, is scheduled to go to the polls this summer. Roughly 1.3 million hearings are yet to be conducted in the state.During the hearing on Monday, a lawyer representing the Akhil Bharat Hindu Mahasabha objected to Banerjee’s personal appearance in the court on February 4 to make submissions. But the bench brushed aside such objections, observing: “What is unheard in it? This shows trust and faith in the constitution. Don’t politicise this issue!”Senior advocates DS Naidu and V Giri, appearing for ECI and petitioner organisation Sanatani Sangsad respectively, submitted that FIRs were not being registered despite repeated complaints, and that citizens were being prevented from filing objections against alleged wrongful inclusion of names from the electoral rolls.Solicitor general Tushar Mehta, appearing for the Centre, described the situation as “alarming”, pointing out that one constitutional body had placed such allegations before the apex court. “The message must go out that the Constitution of India applies to everyone,” he said.The bench, on its part, made it clear that it would not permit any state to impede or derail the SIR exercise. “We would not allow anyone to create impediments in the completion of the SIR. This must be understood by all states,” the court observed.The bench also rejected an oral plea by senior advocate Shyam Divan, appearing for Banerjee, seeking a judicial direction restraining ECI from deleting names due to spelling errors, name mismatches or minor discrepancies. Calling such a direction “pre-emptory”, the bench said it would not interfere mid-process, noting that voters who had received notices still had the opportunity to submit documents and explanations. “Suppose the majority of these notices are dropped after verification, there will be no issue,” the bench observed.The hearing on Monday also witnessed sharp exchanges over the deployment of officials to assist the SIR process. Divan argued that more than 50% of “logical discrepancy” cases -- a category covering around 13.6 million electors – were due to minor spelling or dialect-based variations. He alleged that the process risked mass exclusion of genuine voters.ECI, however, countered that the state government had failed to provide sufficiently senior officers capable of carrying out quasi-judicial adjudication. Naidu said the commission had sought around 300 Group B officers but was initially provided only a fraction, with others being Class C staff or officials unsuited for adjudicatory roles.Amid the dispute, the court recorded that a list of 8,505 officers had been handed over by the state during the Monday hearing, and issued a series of directions to streamline the process. It directed the state to ensure that all 8,505 officers report to ECI by 5 pm on February 10, allowing ECI to assess their suitability.The court also granted ECI liberty to replace officers found not performing their duties and directed that scrutiny of voter documents be carried out in line with the SIR notification and the court’s January 19 order.Significantly, the bench also noted allegations that objection forms had been burnt and that no FIRs lodged despite complaints by election officials. It therefore directed the DGP to personally explain his response to these allegations in ECI’s two affidavits. The latest affidavit, filed a day ago, contended that with the complicity of key actors of the State, including the state government, certain elected representatives of the ruling party, and party functionaries, “every trick in the armoury is being employed to ensure that the SIR process is either stopped or frustrated by fair or foul means” in West Bengal.The matter arises from multiple petitions challenging ECI’s SIR exercise in West Bengal, including one filed by Banerjee, who had personally appeared before the court on February 4, urging it to “protect democracy” and prevent deletion of voters over clerical and linguistic inconsistencies. On that day, the bench asked ECI to act “carefully” while flagging discrepancies, and directed the West Bengal government to propose a list of officers conversant with local dialects who could assist the poll panel in resolving errors without excluding genuine voters.