'Don't Send Notices Indiscriminately': SC Tells ECI on Mamata's SIR Petition

The Supreme Court issued a notice to the Election Commission on Mamata Banerjee’s plea challenging the SIR.

(Photo: Video Screengrab/TMC)

The Supreme Court has issued notice to the Election Commission of India (ECI) in the plea filed by West Bengal Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee challenging the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls in West Bengal.

The bench, led by Chief Justice of India Surya Kant, addressed concerns about the handling of name discrepancies and the potential for large-scale voter disenfranchisement ahead of the upcoming state assembly elections. The matter is scheduled for further hearing on 9 February 2026.

According to Bar and Bench, the Supreme Court directed the ECI to exercise caution when sending notices to voters based on name mismatches.

The bench observed that notices should not be issued indiscriminately, especially to notable individuals, and emphasised the need for careful communication to avoid unnecessary confusion or exclusion from the electoral rolls.

As reported by Live Law, Mamata Banerjee’s petition alleges that the SIR process is opaque and unconstitutional, with serious irregularities in the classification of voters under the ‘Logical Discrepancy’ category. The petition claims that the list of such voters has not been made available online, depriving affected individuals of transparency and an effective opportunity to respond.

Coverage revealed that Banerjee sought urgent directions from the Supreme Court to halt the deletion of voters, particularly those mapped with the 2002 electoral roll and appearing in the draft under the “Logical Discrepancy” category. She requested that anomalies be rectified without disenfranchising genuine voters and that mandatory hearings for minor name mismatches be withdrawn.

The Supreme Court bench, during the hearing, noted the high number of pending hearings and the significant proportion of voters affected by name discrepancies.

The bench suggested that the state provide a team to assist the ECI in verifying cases where local dialect differences may have caused discrepancies in names, aiming to ensure that no eligible voter is excluded due to minor spelling variations.

“Please send notices carefully. You cannot put out notable authors etc. Some discrepancy is due to how you speak in local dialect...such things happen pan India,” the bench observed.

In the proceedings, it was highlighted that over 1.36 crore names were listed under logical discrepancies, with 63 lakh hearings still pending and 8,300 micro observers deputed. Analysis showed that Banerjee’s plea also challenges the appointment of micro observers from outside the state and the rejection of various identification documents, including Aadhaar and domicile certificates, as valid proof for electoral roll inclusion.

The ECI was also directed to provide reasons for each name included in the logical discrepancy list. At the end of the hearing, Banerjee reiterated her apprehension that the SIR process could result in mass disenfranchisement and urged the Court to protect the rights of eligible voters.

“The entire SIR exercise is an effort at disenfranchising the existing voters on the Electoral Roll by forcing them to prove their citizenship with ‘documentary’ evidence against an arbitrary cut-off date of 2002. This violates the Constitution, the Representation of the People Acts of 1950 and 1951,” Banerjee’s plea stated.

Reporting indicated that the Supreme Court has reserved its decision on the legality of the SIR process in West Bengal and other states, with the next hearing scheduled for 9 February 2026.

Note: This article is produced using AI-assisted tools and is based on publicly available information. It has been reviewed by The Quint's editorial team before publishing.