Supreme Court Intervenes in SIR Exercise

Electoral Turbulence in West Bengal: Supreme Court Intervenes in SIR Exercise

Official Legal Report. The detailed account of the Supreme Court proceedings and the list of directions can be found at:
The Presiding Bench. The matter was heard on Monday by a three-judge Bench headed by **Chief Justice of India Surya Kant**, along with Justice Joymalya Bagchi and a third member.
Scale of Impact. The court noted that approximately **1.36 crore people** in West Bengal have been served notices, a figure representing a significant portion of the state’s electorate.

Source

Progeny Criteria. Notices were sent to individuals with more than six “progenies,” a criterion petitioners argued has no statutory or legal basis in electoral law.
Age Gap Anomalies. The EC flagged families where the age gap between parent and child was only **15 years**, or the gap between grandchild and grandparent was less than 40 years.
Naming Inconsistencies. Minor spelling variations in traditional surnames like ‘Ganguly’ vs ‘Gangopadhyay’ or ‘Datta’ vs ‘Dutta’ were categorized as logical errors requiring verification.
Judicial Skepticism. Justice Bagchi questioned the logic of flagging a 15-year age gap, pointedly asking the EC if they were ignoring the historical and social reality of **child marriage** in India.

Mandatory Lists. The Court ordered the EC to display the names of all persons under the “logical discrepancies” category at **Gram Panchayat bhavans**, block offices, and urban ward offices.
Time Extension. Recognizing the chaos, the Bench extended the deadline for citizens to submit objections and supporting records by an additional **10 days**.
Official Receipts. To prevent lost paperwork, EC authorities are now legally mandated to provide applicants with a formal **receipt** detailing every document submitted during verification.
Authorized Representatives. To assist the elderly or illiterate, the Court permitted objections to be filed through **authorized representatives**, provided the authorization is signed or thumb-marked.

Lack of Statutory Sanction. Senior Advocate Shyam Divan argued that the EC “invented” criteria like progeny counts and family age gaps without any backing from the **Representation of the People Act**.
Profiling Concerns. Petitioners alleged that this exercise amounted to “profiling” based on arbitrary parameters that have no relevance to a person’s eligibility to vote.
Verification Logic. Counsel questioned why the EC was prioritizing “how many progenies a parent had” over the simple verification of a citizen’s age and residency.

Venue Shortage. Senior Advocate Kapil Sibal pointed out that the EC has only **500 venues** to conduct hearings for 13.6 million people, whereas at least 1,900 venues are required.
Slow Hearing Pace. Since December 16, only **15 lakh hearings** have been completed, leaving millions of cases pending with only 27 days left until the final publication of rolls.
Human Resource Demand. The Court directed the West Bengal government and the State Election Commission to provide additional manpower to the EC to handle the backlog of objections.

The 2002 Baseline. A major portion of the notices (32 lakh) was sent to “unmapped” individuals—those whose names or family members did not appear in the previous **2002 SIR** records.
Burden of Proof. Citizens in this category must produce historical documents to prove their link to the electoral roll, a process the court noted causes immense hardship to the rural poor.
Mapping Success. Only a fraction of the total flagged population has been successfully “mapped” to previous records without the need for further verification.

Acceptance of Documents. The court took a stern view of the EC’s refusal to accept **Admit Cards** issued by State School and Secondary Boards as proof of age or identity.
Statutory Validity. Justice Bagchi asserted that these are “statutory documents” and that the EC has no legal grounds to reject them during the verification process.
Verification Standard. The Bench emphasized that the goal of the SIR should be inclusion, not the use of hyper-technicalities to exclude genuine voters.

WhatsApp Instructions. Petitioners complained that the EC was sending vital instructions via WhatsApp rather than transparent, public circulars.
Chief Justice’s Observation. CJI Surya Kant ruled that there is “no question of running everything through WhatsApp,” ordering that all instructions must be issued as **formal circulars**.
Need for Publicity. The court stressed that the “rules of the game” must be clearly published so that citizens and political agents know exactly what is required of them.

Booth-Level Agents (BLAs). The petitioners noted that BLAs from political parties were being excluded from verification hearings.
Monitoring Foul Play. While the court focused on individual rights, it acknowledged the need for a transparent process where authorized representatives can prevent “foul play” in mass deletions.
Administrative Neutrality. The court’s directions aim to ensure the EC remains an impartial arbiter during this high-stakes revision process.

Metric	Detail	Impact
Total Notices Issued	~1.36 Crore	20% of the State Population
Discrepancy Categories	Progeny, Age Gaps, Spelling	Leading cause of “Logical” flags
Unmapped Category	32 Lakh People	Names missing from 2002 baseline
Hearings Completed	15 Lakh (since Dec 16)	Severe backlog with < 30 days left
SC Directive	10-Day Extension	Vital relief for document submission