Supreme Court declines to hear plea on voter list deletions, calls it premature

PTI, April 13, 2026, New Delhi: : The Supreme Court of India on Monday declined to entertain a plea by a group of 13 people seeking its intervention in the deletion of their names from the voter list during the Special Institutional Revision (SIR) in West Bengal, where polling for the first phase of the Assembly election will be held on April 23.

A bench comprising Chief Justice Surya Kant and Justice Joymalya Bagchi termed the petition "premature", directing the aggrieved parties to approach the established appellate tribunals instead.

"Since the petitioners (Quaraisha Yeasmin and others) have already approached the appellate tribunals... in our considered view, the apprehensions expressed in the petition are premature. If the plea is allowed, then necessary consequences will follow," the bench said in its order, adding that it has not expressed any views on the merits of the plea.

The plea alleged that the Election Commission of India was summarily deleting names without following due process, and that appeals against these deletions were not being heard in a timely manner.

The Chief Justice of Calcutta High Court has set up as many as 19 tribunals headed by former High Court Chief Justices and judges to decide appeals against deletions of names of persons from the voters' lists.

Senior advocate D S Naidu, appearing for the poll panel, informed the apex court that there are approximately 30 to 34 lakh appeals currently pending.

"Every tribunal now has over one lakh appeals to handle," the bench said.

The petitioners' counsel argued that the poll panel had failed to place necessary orders before the relevant judicial authorities and that the "freezing date" for the electoral rolls should be extended.

"If I am not allowed to argue, then what is the use? Will these appeals be decided within a timeframe or just kept extending?" the counsel questioned.

Justice Bagchi, during the hearing, referred to the sanctity of the electoral process and said the right to vote is not merely a Constitutional formality but a "sentimental" pillar of democracy.

"The right to vote in a country you were born in is not just Constitutional, but sentimental. It is about being part of a democracy and helping elect a government," he said.

He, however, said that the tribunals, manned by former judges, cannot be overburdened by fixing the timelines for adjudications.

"It is not the end justifying the means, but the means justifying the end," Justice Bagchi said.

"We need to protect due process rights. The voter should not be sandwiched between two Constitutional authorities," he said, adding that it would not interdict the election process at this stage.