ECI deviated from SIR procedure in Bengal: SC judge
What's the story
Justice Joymalya Bagchi of the Supreme Court has flagged some concerns over the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) process in West Bengal, saying the Election Commission deviated from the process in other states like Bihar. He said the ECI introduced a new category of 'Logical Discrepancy' in Bengal, which deviates from procedures followed in other states. He stressed on the need for a "robust appellate mechanism" to address appeals from those removed from electoral rolls.
ECI scrutiny
ECI's approach inconsistent across states
Justice Bagchi pointed out that when it came to Bihar, voters who were mapped in the 2002 electoral roll weren't required to upload documents. He said judicial officers can't be expected to work with 100% accuracy under pressure. He argued that even a 70% accuracy rate is "excellent" when dealing with over 1,000 documents daily against tight deadlines.
Voter rights
Concerns over electoral outcomes with excluded voters
However, Justice Bagchi raised concerns about potential electoral outcomes if a significant portion of the electorate doesn't vote. He asked, "If 10% of the electorate does not vote and the winning margin is more than 10%...what will happen?" "Suppose margin is 2% and 15% of electorate who are mapped could not vote, then maybe, we are not expressing any opinion, but we would definitely have to apply our minds," Justice Bagchi told ECI.
Election appeal
Petitioners request extension of electoral roll freezing date
The Supreme Court bench, headed by Chief Justice of India Surya Kant and Justice Bagchi, was hearing a writ petition from those appealing their exclusion from voter rolls. The petitioners requested an extension of the electoral roll freezing date to participate in upcoming assembly elections if their appeals are accepted. They argued they were on the 2002 roll and had Aadhaar cards and Passports.
CJI
CJI Surya Kant was hesitant to interfere
However, CJI Surya Kant was hesitant to interfere, saying it's up to the Tribunal to decide. The petitioners' counsel then alleged that ECI was non-cooperative with the Appellate Tribunal. At this point, Justice Bagchi observed that the ECI had deviated from its stand in the Bihar SIR. Senior Advocate Dama Seshadri Naidu for ECI then argued that such individuals do not need to upload any papers other than proof that they are the same person identified on the 2002 list.
Rejection rate
Justice Bagchi's blunt response to rejection rates post SIR
"If that is so, please see your written submissions in...Bihar....It is not that the entire electorate has to upload the documents. You are deviating from your original argument," Justice Bagchi said. When Naidu also said that the rejection rate after SIR adjudication was 47%, Justice Bagchi responded that "it's not end justifying means but means justifying the end." He stressed that this shouldn't be a blame game between state and ECI but rather about voters caught between two constitutional authorities.
Voting importance
Voting is constitutional right, says Justice Bagchi
"If you go through 1000 documents a day and the accuracy is 70% then the activity should be rated....excellent," he said. "We need to have a robust appellate mechanism and a continuing right," Justice Bagchi said. "Right to vote in a country you were born in is not only constitutional but sentimental....you are a part of democracy and help in electing a government," he added. The bench dismissed the petition but left open the remedy of appeal to the petitioners.