Supreme Court considers supplementary voter rolls ahead of Bengal polls

PTI, April 14, 2026, Kolkata: Assuring that it is “seeking to focus” on the publication of a supplementary electoral roll based on the progress of appeals disposed of within a week, the Supreme Court of India on Monday offered a silver lining to voters whose names may be cleared by appellate tribunals ahead of the West Bengal Assembly elections.

The bench comprising Chief Justice of India Surya Kant and Justice Joymalya Bagchi, however, expressed reluctance to permit individuals excluded from the electoral rolls to vote while their appeals remain pending, reiterating its view from last week.

Earlier in the day, the court noted the need for a robust appellate mechanism, while also observing that if the winning margin is less than the percentage of exclusion, it may be a matter of concern.

“Unfair denial of participation as a candidate is a ground to cancel an election. But right to vote will per se, until and unless it is an enormous number of electors, S.100 does not fall as one of the grounds for cancelling an election. If 10% of electorate does not vote and 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. Please keep this in mind that the concern of a vigilant voter whose name correctly or incorrectly is not in the list is not in our minds,” Justice Bagchi told the Election Commission.

Meanwhile, the Chief Justice of the Calcutta High Court on Monday informed the bench that over 34 lakh appeals had been filed as of April 11, raising concerns over whether 19 appellate tribunals could dispose of them before polling on April 23 and 29.

On submission by senior advocate Kalyan Banerjee that all who have filed appeals should be allowed to vote in the two-phase Assembly election due later this month, the apex court observed that if excluded persons were granted interim voting rights, similar relief would have to extend to objectors challenging wrongful inclusions.

It pointed out that nearly 55 per cent of objections had been rejected, and those appellants could equally seek restraint on such voters.

“If the judicial officers had completed their adjudication in the first instance in respect of any Assembly constituency by April 9, even if they have exceeded one or two days... we have given the answer. For constituencies whose last date of nomination is April 6, the list was published on the night of April 6, there was some spillover, those names will be included in the electoral roll for the April 23 election. If their names are there, they can vote,” Justice Bagchi said.

Appearing for the state, senior advocate Shyam Divan cited the Representation of the People Act, 1950, to argue that existing rolls should prevail if revision remains incomplete.

The bench emphasised that pendency of an appeal does not suspend the primary decision, and rules do not permit interim reversal of exclusion.

The court also noted that under Rule 23(5) of the Registration of Electors Rules, 1960, electoral rolls must be immediately amended if an appeal is allowed, indicating possible recourse to Article 142 (special power of the Supreme Court) to facilitate such corrections without disrupting the process.

It cautioned against overburdening tribunals with unrealistic timelines.

Separately, Justice Bagchi flagged deviations by the Election Commission of India in West Bengal’s revision, including the introduction of a “logical discrepancy” category.

Justice Bagchi also stated that the ECI deviated from the stand taken in the Bihar SIR matter that persons who were mapped in the 2002 electoral roll need not upload documents.

Meanwhile, the appellate tribunal at Joka began functioning on Monday, with 16 retired judges dealing with the appeals.