The Supreme Court of India on Monday declined to entertain a petition filed by 13 individuals seeking judicial intervention against the deletion of their names from the West Bengal voter list. A bench comprising Chief Justice Surya Kant and Justice Joymalya Bagchi termed the plea “premature,” emphasizing that the petitioners must first exhaust the remedies available through the established appellate tribunals before seeking relief from the apex court.
The legal challenge arose during the Special Institutional Revision (SIR) in West Bengal, ahead of the first phase of the assembly elections scheduled for April 23. The petitioners, including Quaraisha Yeasmin and others, alleged that the Election Commission (EC) had been summarily deleting names from the electoral rolls without adhering to due process.
The plea further contended that the EC had failed to present necessary orders before judicial authorities and sought an extension of the “freezing date” for the electoral rolls. The petitioners expressed concern that their appeals against these deletions were not being heard in a timely manner, effectively disenfranchising them.
During the hearing, senior advocate D.S. Naidu, representing the poll panel, revealed a staggering administrative challenge. He informed the court that approximately 30 to 34 lakh appeals are currently pending.
The Chief Justice of the Calcutta High Court has already established 19 tribunals, headed by former High Court chief justices and judges, to adjudicate these disputes. The bench noted the immense pressure on these bodies, stating, “Every tribunal now has over one lakh appeals to handle.”
While the court declined to interfere with the election process at this stage, Justice Joymalya Bagchi spoke at length about the significance of the right to vote. He described it as more than a constitutional formality, labeling it a “sentimental” pillar of democracy.
“The right to vote in a country you were born in is not just constitutional, but sentimental. It is about being part of a democracy and helping elect a government,” Justice Bagchi observed. However, he cautioned against overburdening the tribunals by fixing rigid timelines, noting, “It is not the end justifying the means, but the means justifying the end.”
The bench reiterated that judicial intervention is intended to “promote elections, not interdict them.” The court emphasized that unless an “enormous number” of voters are excluded to the point of materially affecting the election results, the process cannot be halted.
Justice Bagchi highlighted that the Calcutta High Court has already formulated the mode for appeals, which commenced this Monday. Consequently, the court maintained that the petitioners’ apprehensions were premature as they had already approached the appellate tribunals.
“We need to protect due process rights. The voter should not be sandwiched between two constitutional authorities,” the bench noted, while clarifying it has not expressed any views on the merits of the case.
The West Bengal Assembly elections are set to take place in two phases on April 23 and 29, with the counting of votes scheduled for May 4.
