SC raps EC on SIR ‘discrepancies’, says voting is a sentimental right

SC raps EC on SIR ‘discrepancies’, says voting is a sentimental right

The Supreme Court on Monday told the Election Commission (EC) that the right to be on the electoral roll and to vote in one’s own country was not only constitutional but also sentimental.

The top court was referring to lakhs of voters excluded for “logical discrepancies” lining up for appeal hearings in West Bengal, hardly 10 days ahead of the Assembly election, following an “inquisitorial” special intensive revision (SIR).

The court said 34 lakh appeals by voters purged from the West Bengal electoral roll had been filed for hearing before 19 appellate tribunals and there were over a lakh appeals pending before each of these tribunals.

The poll body had locked in the electoral roll for the State on April 9, days ahead of the polling on April 23 and 29.

After months of interventions to make the SIR more inclusive, the top court made cutting remarks about the impact of an exercise the poll body said was necessary to “purify the electoral roll”.

“The right to remain on the electoral roll, the right to vote in the country you are born in is something which is not only constitutional but sentimental. It is the biggest expression of nationality and patriotism that you are in a participatory process to elect a democratic government,” Justice Joymalya Bagchi, part of the Bench headed by Chief Justice of India Surya Kant, said while addressing the poll body.

Senior advocate Dama Seshadri Naidu, for the poll body, said “statistics” proved West Bengal did not “stand out” and was “on par” with other States in the number of exclusions.

‘Question of fairness’

“We are not bothered about West Bengal ‘standing out’. But no other State has a category called ‘logical discrepancy’. We have examined Bihar, we did not find a single person flagged for logical discrepancy… This is not a question of inflating or shrinking the EC, but of fairness,” Justice Bagchi said.

The judge noted that the Supreme COurt had permitted the poll body to embark on an inquisitorial exercise mindful of the latter’s concern about the electoral rolls.

“The original SIR notification said voters in the 2002 electoral roll would not be touched. The 2002 roll would be the benchmark. But when you introduced ‘logical discrepancy’, you infracted that rule,” Justice Bagchi told the EC.

Mr. Naidu said voters who could prove their credentials were retained. Those with disparity in their names or other background details were asked to provide details, which were verified.

“A voter in the 2002 roll was not required to give anything… When the Bihar SIR was argued, and the Bihar SIR was a facsimile of the SIR we are dealing with today, the EC was unequivocal when it submitted that a person in the 2002 voter list does not have to prove anything. No uploading of documents was required… And then you deviated from your original arguments,” Justice Bagchi said.

Uncertain atmosphere

So far, the Supreme Court had avoided any direct criticism of the SIR.

The flurry of oral observations from Justice Bagchi indicated a judicial calling-out of the atmosphere of uncertainty and crisis which gripped the population during a hasty SIR process, especially in poll-bound West Bengal.

Justice Bagchi referred to how the exclusion of voters in the name of logical discrepancy came “so close” to the date of election in West Bengal that the top court had to step in and deploy judicial officers to hear out the objections. This was all the more reason why the appeal process must not be hurried, the judge said.