Every person born in India has the right to get their name registered in the voter list and to vote to choose the government. The right to vote is not only constitutional but also emotional. Participating in the democratic process of electing a government is the greatest expression of nationality and patriotism. It is the responsibility of the Election Commission to include the name of every eligible voter in the voter list.
After the removal of 91 lakh voters’ names in the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) in West Bengal by the Election Commission, there has been an uproar. Although the Supreme Court on Monday refused to allow those voters in the West Bengal Assembly elections whose names have been removed in the SIR and whose complaints are pending in appellate tribunals. More than 34 lakh appeals have been filed by April 11, and their decisions are still pending. It is clear that 10 days before the elections, at this stage, even the Supreme Court cannot interfere in the election process, because if such objections keep arising, how will elections be conducted?
During the hearing, Justice Jaymala Bagchi raised sharp questions to the Election Commission and expressed serious concern regarding the SIR process of the voter list in West Bengal. The bench of Chief Justice Suryakant and Justice Bagchi was hearing a petition filed by those whose names were removed from the voter list. To hear appeals rejected by election officials, 19 appellate tribunals have been set up under the leadership of former judges, one of which is headed by a former judge of the Calcutta High Court. Most of these 19 tribunals have not even started functioning.
The petitioners demanded an extension of the date for freezing the voter list. They argued that if they are allowed to vote, they will be able to participate in the Assembly elections. Justice Bagchi raised an important question: what if the winning margin is less than the percentage of excluded voters? He said, “If 10 percent of people do not vote and the winning margin is more than 10 percent, what then? If the winning margin is 2 percent and non-voting is 15 percent, then what? We are not expressing any opinion, but we need to use our minds.”
Justice Bagchi said that the SIR process in Bengal is different from other states, and here the Election Commission has introduced a new category called “logical discrepancy.” He said that the Commission is also not following the process used elsewhere, which states that those who voted in the 2002 elections do not need to upload documents. He added that this is also mentioned in the SIR notice.
The bench also said that how can 100% correct decisions be expected from judicial officers examining objections and claims when each officer is checking around 1,000 documents daily within strict deadlines? Even if 70% accuracy is considered excellent, there will always be room for error. Therefore, a strong appellate mechanism is needed in the state. The bench also said that somewhere we are becoming blinded by the dust and anger of upcoming elections.
After the Supreme Court raised questions on the Election Commission, concerns are being raised about the fairness of the upcoming elections in West Bengal. The ruling Trinamool Congress, Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee, Congress, and other parties are targeting the Election Commission. Doubts about the credibility of the Election Commission are deepening. A crisis of trust has emerged in electoral democracy. In the absence of fairness, it affects citizen participation, voter turnout, and social unity.
The strength of electoral democracy in India depends on the fairness and trust of its citizens. As the constitutional guardian of this trust, the Election Commission should go beyond legal compliance and work to maintain institutional credibility. It would be better if the appellate tribunals hear appeals based on the principle of inclusiveness. For now, the affected voters have no option except to approach the tribunals. It is certain that this process will only be completed after the elections.
