The Supreme Court on Monday disagreed with the West Bengal government which pleaded with the top court to wait for a few more days before freezing the electoral roll so that many of the over 20 lakh voters, who failed to convince judicial officers that there were no ‘logical discrepancies’ in their details provided under the special intensive revision (SIR) of the roll, get a chance to vote in the Assembly elections on April 23 and April 29.
On the gheraoing of judicial officers in the State’s Malda district on April 1, the top court invoked powers under Article 142 of the Constitution and Chief Justice of India Surya Kant, heading a Bench, said the incident was not an emotional outburst, but a “well-planned, calculated and deeply instigated” move. The court directed the National Investigation Agency to take over the investigation in the case.
Also Read: West Bengal SIR hearing Highlights on April 6, 2026
In a connected hearing, the court pulled up the West Bengal Chief Secretary, who had gone incommunicado despite repeated calls for aid by the Chief Justice of the Calcutta High Court on April 1. The Chief Secretary, along with the Director General of Police, appeared online and apologised to the court. “Lower yourself a bit so that ordinary minions like the Chief Justice of the High Court can access you,” Justice Joymalya Bagchi told the two officials.
Chief Justice Kant said the bureaucracy drew their obstinacy from being “pampered”.
The hearing began with senior advocate Shyam Divan, appearing for West Bengal, saying there were long, meandering queues of voters in the State who could not pass the verification by judicial officers and remained excluded from the electoral rolls.
Mr. Divan said the 19 appellate tribunals should be asked to dispose of the appeals by April 15. A final supplementary electoral roll, including the names of voters who have won their appeals, could be published on April 18, five days ahead of April 23, the first polling date.
Electors, whose appeals could not be decided by April 15, could be included in the electoral roll. Freezing the electoral rolls on April 6, the last date of filing nominations for the first phase, would deprive lakhs of their right to vote and would amount to ignoring the appellate process, he submitted. “Appeals are a continuation of the adjudication process, and no elector should be disenfranchised. These are mapped, electors. They had voted in the 2002 elections,” Mr. Divan said.
But Justice Joymalya Bagchi said a tribunal hearing cannot be “compressed”. Principles of natural justice were involved, and the hearing of appeals cannot be made into a hasty exercise to fit a pre-conceived deadline of April 15, as suggested by the State.
The court said the issue of logical discrepancies was “peculiar” to West Bengal, prompting the apex court to deploy judicial officers to verify objections. The court noted that out of over 60 lakh objections, 59.15 lakh were disposed of by the judicial officers.
Senior advocate Dama Seshadiri Naidu, appearing for the Election Commission, said the verification exercise of all objections would be completed by April 6 night and a supplementary list published.
“Due to the enormous effort of the judicial officers, we have attained the closure of 60 lakh objections challenging logical discrepancies. Now, we have to draw a line and freeze the electoral roll. Persons aggrieved would be able to file appeals. The appellate tribunals would formulate their own procedure based on the principles of natural justice, and a final order would be delivered. That may, however, take a month or 60 days… How can the tribunals work when so much pressure is put on them,” Justice Bagchi asked.
Justice Bagchi pointed out that the number of appeals may cross lakhs in the next several days. “Each and every person would love to have his case decided at the earliest. Nineteen tribunals racing to finish by April 15 would only create chaos,” he said.
The apex court left it to the Chief Justice of the Calcutta High Court to form a committee, which would frame a procedure of functioning for the 19 tribunals. The Bench ordered the tribunals to become functional immediately.
Referring to the issue of lengthy queues outside appeal-filing centres, Chief Justice Kant asked why people cannot file appeals online. “Online is cheaper than offline,” he said.
Published – April 06, 2026 08:28 pm IST
