In an unprecedented intervention by a sitting chief minister, West Bengal Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee on Wednesday personally addressed the Supreme Court, alleging that the ongoing Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls in her state was politically motivated and had led to immense human distress including the deaths of over 150 people.
Appearing before a bench comprising Chief Justice of India Surya Kant and Justices Joymalya Bagchi and Vipul Pancholi, Banerjee claimed the voter verification exercise was being weaponised to selectively target West Bengal ahead of the upcoming Assembly elections. She urged the court to intervene, arguing that the process threatened the democratic rights of ordinary citizens.
‘Why Only Bengal?’
Questioning the intent behind the exercise, Banerjee asked why West Bengal alone was subjected to such an intensive revision.
“Why Bengal? Why not Assam or other northeastern states?” she asked the bench. “The Election Commission is only targeting Bengal to bulldoze the people of the state.”
The Trinamool Congress (TMC) supremo alleged that the SIR was being carried out with unusual urgency and without sufficient safeguards, despite no comparable exercise having been undertaken in the state for over two decades.
Claims of Deaths Due to Stress
In one of the most striking submissions, Banerjee told the court that more than 150 people had died due to the pressure and stress associated with the electoral revision process.
She cited the case of a Booth Level Officer (BLO) who allegedly died after suffering severe mental strain following directives issued by the Chief Electoral Officer. According to Banerjee, field-level officials and citizens alike were being pushed beyond reasonable limits under tight deadlines and intense scrutiny.
“These are not just numbers. These are human lives,” she said, stressing that the burden of the exercise had fallen disproportionately on grassroots workers and vulnerable sections of society.
Massive Deletions Without Appeal, CM Claims
Banerjee claimed that the first phase of the SIR had resulted in the deletion of nearly 58 lakh names from the electoral rolls, many without giving affected voters a chance to appeal under Form 6, which allows corrections and inclusion.
She alleged that the deletions were largely carried out by micro-observers who were not local to the state and, in many cases, hailed from BJP-ruled states. Local electoral staff, she said, were sidelined during the process.
Valid documents such as domicile certificates and other government-issued identity proofs were reportedly rejected without explanation, Banerjee told the court.
‘Designed for Deletions’
Arguing that the SIR appeared skewed towards removing names rather than correcting records, Banerjee highlighted what she described as arbitrary and unreasonable grounds for deletions.
Minor discrepancies such as women changing surnames after marriage or shifting residences after moving to their in-laws’ homes were being flagged as mismatches, she said. Migrant workers who temporarily moved for employment were categorised under “logical discrepancies” and risked removal from the rolls.
“This exercise is not about corrections. It is about deletions,” she argued.
Timing Under Fire
Banerjee also questioned the timing and pace of the exercise, calling it unnecessary and disruptive.
“After 24 years, what was the hurry to finish this in four months?” she asked. “What could have been done in two years is being forced through in a few months.”
She pointed out that notices were issued during the harvest season and Puja festivities, periods when many people were away from their homes, making compliance difficult or impossible.
‘No Response From Election Commission’
Expressing frustration with the Election Commission of India (ECI), Banerjee said she had written six letters raising concerns about the SIR but received no response.
“Justice is crying behind closed doors,” she said. “Lawyers always come in when everything is finished.”
Striking a personal note, Banerjee told the court she was not fighting for political gain.
“I am a less important person, a bonded labourer,” she said. “I am not fighting for my party. I am an ordinary person seeking justice.”
Sharp Words for Election Commission
As she concluded her submissions, Banerjee delivered a scathing critique of the poll body, referring to it as the “WhatsApp Commission.”
“The Election Commission sorry, the WhatsApp Commission is doing all this,” she said. “People’s names are being deleted. Bengal is being targeted.”
Her remarks drew attention to what she described as informal and opaque modes of communication being used during the exercise.
Supreme Court Seeks ECI Response
After hearing Banerjee’s arguments, the Supreme Court adjourned the matter and issued a notice to the Election Commission of India, directing it to file its response by February 10.
The bench is hearing multiple petitions challenging the SIR process in West Bengal, with the case now set to test the balance between electoral integrity and voter inclusion.
A High-Stakes Legal Battle
The confrontation between the West Bengal government and the Election Commission comes amid heightened political tensions ahead of the state elections. Banerjee’s decision to personally argue before the apex court underscores the seriousness with which her government views the issue.
As the legal battle unfolds, the court’s eventual ruling could have far-reaching implications not only for West Bengal, but for how voter roll revisions are conducted across the country in the run-up to elections.
