(Image source from: PTI)
The Supreme Court has refused to provide temporary voting rights to individuals whose names were removed during the voter roll cleanup known as special intensive revision (SIR) and whose appeals are still being considered by appellate bodies. During the discussions, Trinamool Congress leader Kalyan Banerjee mentioned that over 1.6 million appeals have been submitted, and these individuals ought to be allowed to participate in the upcoming two-phase assembly election later this month. In reply, Chief Justice of India Surya Kant stated, "That is completely out of the question. If we allow this, then the voting rights of those individuals would have to be put on hold. " Justice Joymalya Bagchi pointed out that there are 3.4 million pending appeals regarding the SIR process, and noted that a report from the Chief Justice of the Calcutta High Court clearly provided this information. The Election Commission of India (ECI) has already frozen the voter list for Bengal, meaning no new names can be added before the election, unless the Supreme Court specifically orders otherwise, which did not happen today. Nineteen appellate tribunals have been established in the state next to Bangladesh to handle the 2.7 million cases that have been removed during judicial proceedings.
The Supreme Court's decision followed a request from a group of 13 individuals seeking its help regarding the removal of their names from the Bengal voter list. The court deemed the petition "premature" and advised them to approach the appellate tribunals instead. "Since the petitioners (Quaraisha Yeasmin and others) have already contacted the appellate tribunals… in our view, the concerns raised in the petition are premature. If the request is approved, necessary consequences will follow," the bench mentioned in its ruling, adding that it has not commented on the validity of the request. The petition claimed that the Election Commission was hastily deleting names without following proper procedures and that appeals against these removals were not being heard quickly.
Senior lawyer DS Naidu, representing the EC, stated that there are roughly 30-34 lakh appeals still pending. However, the petitioners claimed that the EC did not issue necessary orders to the relevant judicial bodies and that the "freezing date" for the electoral rolls should be postponed. "If I cannot present my argument, then what is the purpose? Will these appeals be resolved within a certain timeframe or just keep getting delayed? " their lawyer questioned. Justice Bagchi highlighted the importance of the electoral process, stating, "The right to vote in your home country is not just a constitutional issue; it is also sentimental. It relates to being part of a democracy and contributing to the election of a government. " Nevertheless, he mentioned that tribunals led by former judges should not be overloaded with setting deadlines for decision-making. "The end does not justify the means, but the means must justify the end," Justice Bagchi asserted. "We must ensure due process rights are preserved. Voters should not be caught between two constitutional bodies".
