West Bengal Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee appeared at the Supreme Court of India on Wednesday as the apex bench took up multiple petitions challenging the Special Intensive Revision of electoral rolls being carried out in her state ahead of the forthcoming 2026 Legislative Assembly election. Banerjee, who holds a law degree, arrived at the court complex in New Delhi under tight security and moved to participate directly in the proceedings, submitting an interim application asking the Chief Justice to allow her to argue her plea in person. The hearing, heard by Chief Justice Surya Kant alongside Justices Joymalya Bagchi and Vipul M. Pancholi, attracted intense attention as the chief minister and her legal team presented objections to the ongoing roll revision exercise.
Her petition, filed on 28 January, names the Election Commission of India and the West Bengal Chief Electoral Officer as respondents and raises constitutional concerns about the manner in which the SIR is being implemented in the state. Supporters of Banerjee argue that the scale and pace of the revision risk disenfranchising large numbers of voters, particularly through its handling of so-called “logical discrepancies” in existing voter data.
The apex court’s docket on Wednesday included other petitions as well, including those from Trinamool Congress MPs Derek O’Brien and Dola Sen, as well as a separate public interest application by Mostari Banu, all contesting facets of the SIR exercise. Banerjee’s presence marked one of the few occasions a sitting state chief minister has sought to appear personally before the court in an electoral matter, underscoring the political stakes of the legal battle.
Around the Supreme Court precincts, deployment of additional police personnel reflected the high-profile nature of the matter, with observers noting the broader implications for electoral integrity and governance. As proceedings got underway, Banerjee’s counsel argued that the SIR process had been conducted with procedural flaws that went beyond routine administrative corrections and affected the fundamental rights of electors.
Central to the arguments is the handling of “logical discrepancies” – a term used by the poll body to describe inconsistencies in voter data, including mismatches in names and age data linking present records to the 2002 voter list. Critics of the exercise assert that notices issued to voters over minor divergences, such as spelling differences or familial age gaps, could lead to unnecessary removals from the rolls, triggering legal challenges and public unease.
The Election Commission, for its part, maintains that SIR is a lawful exercise aimed at purifying electoral rolls by addressing duplicate entries and other anomalies ahead of multiple state polls, including those in West Bengal. Though the poll body has directed officials to expedite hearings and documentation uploads in Bengal, it has dismissed allegations of arbitrariness as politically motivated.
Banerjee’s legal team pressed for broader acceptance of documents such as Aadhaar and various state-issued identity and residence certificates to establish voter authenticity, and urged the court to prohibit deletion of voters from the rolls unless there was clear statutory backing. The chief minister’s application underscored concerns about disenfranchisement, particularly if mandatory personal hearings were retained as a blanket requirement for resolving queries.
Political momentum around the SIR dispute intensified beyond the courtroom, with the Trinamool Congress contemplating an impeachment motion against the Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar, according to party sources. The confrontation has strained relations between the state leadership and the poll body, with both sides trading sharp rhetoric on media platforms and through official communications.