"They Want To Target Bengal On Eve Of Election; Why Not Assam?': WB CM Mamata Banerjee Submits Before Supreme Court In SIR Case

During the hearing related to a plea against the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) process in the State of West Bengal, Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee appeared in person and submitted in the Court that the Election Commission is targeting the State on the eve of elections and that the SIR process is only for deletion and not for exclusion.

She questioned the extreme urgency of the three-month timeline, noting that the pressure led to over 100 deaths, including those of Booth Level Officers, and accused the ECI of operating via informal instructions through WhatsApp.

The Bench of Chief Justice Surya Kant and Justice Joymalya Bagchi ordered, "Issue Notice. Assisting counsels on behalf of ECI accepts notice. During the course of the hearing, Ld. Solicitor General says there is another writ petition...in which the ECI has filed an affidavit which will have some bearing on this case. Let that case be also taken up on Monday...The parties shall have the instructions on Monday."

Senior Advocate Shyam Diwan appeared for Mamata Banerjee, Senior Advocate DS Naidu, and Senior Advocate Rakesh Dwivedi appeared for ECI.

Mamata Banerjee submitted, "Chief Justice Sir, I only have one submission. I can show you photographs...It is not my photograph...It is by bengali leading newspapers...The SIR process is only for deletion, not for exclusion. Suppose a daughter, after marriage, goes to in laws house...The question is why she is using her husband's title, etc. That is what they are doing, there are some daughters who moved to in laws house...they are unilaterally deleted...Sometimes some people work some office...They transferred other offices...They work somewhere...Sometimes the poor people they purchase the flats...They shifted their addresses...But there the genuine people are staying there...But because of the name of logical discrepancy now they changed the name...Sir can they even violate your order?...Number two Sir...Bengal people are so happy...That this court gave order...that Aadhar card will be one of the proof documents. But they said no...In other States the domicile certificate is allowed...the family register card is allowed...the government housing card is allowed....The health card is allowed."

She further said, "They only targeted West Bengal on the eve of the election. They wanted to do something in two months which takes two years. When people are out, they did it. BLOs committed suicided and they blamed the election officials. It is because of the harassment, West Bengal is targeted, why not Assam?"

It was submitted that these actions lead to large-scale disenfranchisement and alleged serious irregularities in how the ECI classifies individuals under the ‘Logical Discrepancy’ category. She contended that the ECI fails to upload these lists online, which deprives citizens of transparency and the chance to respond.

Diwan submitted, "Please see the brief note by the Petitioner...Please see the number of days left to complete the hearing, it is only 4 days. Unmapped voters are 32 lakhs. 1.36 crores in the logical discrepancy list. Hearings pending is around 63 lakhs."

Divan then said, "ECI has to upload the reasons for citing each of the names in the logical discrepancy list. After the directions of this court, the name, age, and gender are there...no reasons are given."

Justice Bagchi said, "We were informed that it is on the website."

Divan said, "Some reasons must be given. People should know why they are not in the list."

Chief Justice said, "Yes, to the extent the person should know is fine...the only thing is the mode in which they are informed. We were told that the list is not only communication, but individual notices are being given."

Chief Justice Kant then said, "If the State provides a team well conversant in Bangla and tells the commission that it is a local dialect mistake...then it will help them. It is apparent in some cases..."

Mamata Banerjee said, "If I may say something...I belong to that State. I am very grateful because of your kindness, Chief Justice, Justice Bagchi and Justice Pancholi...When justice is crying behind the door.. then we thought we are not getting justice anywhere. We wrote 6 letters to the Election Commission. I am a bonded labour...I prefer that; I am not fighting for my party."

Chief Justice intervened and said, "The State of West Bengal, in its own right, has also filed a writ petition. The best counsels are there in the Supreme Court to represent the case of the state. Mr Divan, Mr Sibal and the best of best are there to assist us...On 19 January, when the matter came to us, Mr. Sibal very eloquently he explained the procedural difficulties which the state was experiencing. And where the state had some genuine apprehension for exclusion of the bona fide citizens of the India citizens of West Bengal..."

"So therefore those directions the directions Mr. Diwan just read out were issued. Today in your petition some additional issues are being planned...Issues are being planned...Every problem has a solution. So we must look towards the solution in order to ensure that no innocent citizen is left out. This SIR is based upon only on three grounds. Dead persons excluded, no difficulty neither you will want nor anybody will plead for the dead persons. Similarly the persons who are disqualified to remain for any reason. Somebody is convicted, whatever may be any ground in the law. You will not plead their case. Similarly those migrants. The word is migrants. Migrants are also one of the grounds. Those who have left West Bengal even you will not plead there. But the genuine persons must remain there ", the Court added.

Accordingly, the matter is now listed on February 9, 2026.

Previously, the Court issued directions regarding the 1.25 crores voters in West Bengal falling in the category of 'Logistical Discrepancies'. The Court directed the Election Commission of India to hear the objections/discrepancies to these voters and to make smooth arrangements for such objections.

The Court noted that there were about 1.25 crores notices which have been issued for the purpose of the verification of documents, out of them, one category is described as 'logical discrepancy'. These notices were categorised into three headings, i.e. 1. Mapped, linked with the previous SIR of 2002; 2. Unmapped, voters who are not linked with the SIR of 2002; and 3. Logical Discrepancy, which comprises the maximum voters of 1.36 crores.

The Supreme Court had sought a response from the Election Commission on fresh interim pleas of Trinamool Congress MPs alleging arbitrariness and procedural irregularities in the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls in West Bengal.

Previously, the Supreme Court had sought a response from the Election Commission on fresh interim pleas of Trinamool Congress MPs alleging arbitrariness and procedural irregularities in the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls in West Bengal.

Derek O'Brien, in his plea, alleged arbitrariness and procedural irregularities in the SIR of electoral rolls in the state. The application said that since the inception of the SIR process in the state, the EC has issued instructions to officers at the ground level through "informal and extra-statutory channels", such as WhatsApp messages and oral directions conveyed during video conferences, instead of issuing formal written instructions. It said that on November 30 last year, the poll panel granted only a limited extension of time in relation to the revision schedule and fixed January 15, 2026, as the last date for submission of claims and objections. The application has sought a direction from the EC to extend the deadline for submitting claims and objections.

The Court had also sought separate responses of the Election Commission (EC) on pleas filed by DMK, CPI(M), West Bengal Congress and Trinamool Congress leaders challenging the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of the electoral rolls in Tamil Nadu and West Bengal, respectively. Regarding the plea related to the violence against the BLOs in the State of West Bengal, the Court said that they are going to hear it on January 21, 2026.

Cause Title: Mamata Banerjee v. Election Commission of India [W.P.(C) No. 129 of 2026], Mostari Banu v. The Election Commission of India [W.P. (C) No. 1089/ 2025] and Derek O' Brien v. The Election Commission of India [W.P. (C) No. 737/ 2025]