Mamata’s day in Supreme Court: ‘Bengal bulldozed… SIR for deletion’

Although her vehicle was parked right next to the stairs leading up to the CJI’s Courtroom 1, Banerjee chose to take the staircase on the side, allowing a longer walk through the court corridors. She greeted lawyers and slipped into the visitors’ gallery, rather than immediately taking a front‑row seat.

At 12:50 pm, barely minutes before the Court usually breaks for lunch, West Bengal’s legal team mentioned the case to the CJI. “Item number 37 is Madam Mamata’s,” the CJI said, adding that the case would be heard in a few minutes.

This videograb shows West Bengal CM Mamata Banerjee speaking in the Supreme Court on Wednesday.

Senior Advocate Shyam Divan, who appeared for the state government, began the arguments and said that several logical discrepancies in the draft list are due to differences in the translation of names from Bengali to English. The 2003 voter list is in Bengali, which is being translated to English for the current revision. Lawyers cited examples of spelling variations such as “Dutta” versus “Datta”.

As Justice Joymalya Bagchi, who, along with Justice Vipul M Pancholi, was part of the bench, explained the Bengali pronunciation to his colleagues, Banerjee made her first intervention.

“May I explain, Sir? I come from that region,” she said.

“Can there be any doubt about that?” the CJI responded, in a lighter vein. The banter broke the ice, and Banerjee then made specific arguments about the case. She spoke of “justice crying behind the door” of ordinary voters left out due to mismatch in their names, and cited examples of daughters shifting to their in‑laws’ homes, families being deleted from the rolls after moving house.

“What was the hurry to do what takes two years, only within three months,” she said and urged the bench to “save democracy”. She contended that the poll body had appointed micro-observers from BJP-ruled states “to bulldoze the Bengali people”.

The bench issued notice to the ECI on her petition and posted the matter for hearing on February 9.

On a request made by the Commission and Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, the Court directed that the matter be taken up along with another petition in which the poll body, in a counter affidavit, has highlighted “hostilities” faced by its officials in West Bengal.

Explaining why she had filed the petition, Banerjee told the Court: “We are not getting justice. We have written six letters to ECI, including all details, but no reply.” She added that she was not fighting for her party.

When Banerjee’s submissions shifted to political rhetoric — she asked “why not Assam” for a special revision — the CJI said: “Every problem has a solution. So we must look to the solution to ensure that no innocent citizen is left out…”

“You will not plead for those who have been removed on grounds like migration etc, but the genuine persons must remain. Among the genuine persons, one of the issues which Divan raised, and we are thankful to you also, is that in your petition, this issue has been raised, that because of the local dialect…mismatches happen. They will have to find a solution. They will not like to run away from the responsibility that by virtue of this kind of mistake, the genuine and bona fide persons must not be excluded,” he said.

The CJI asked the poll panel to instruct officials to be more sensitive while issuing notices on grounds of minor discrepancies such as mismatch in the spelling of names.

The CM’s language was sharp — she referred to the Election Commission as the “WhatsApp Commission”, accused it of targeting West Bengal on the eve of elections, and claimed that “their SIR process is only for deletion, not for inclusion.”

“And more than 100 people died. Can you imagine? BLOs died and they have written a letter that the CEO is responsible for my suicide. So many BLOs died. And also more than 150 people died, and so many are hospitalised, because of the harassment of the people. Because Bengal is targeted,” she said. Raising her pitch, she asked, “Sir, you tell me, why not Assam? Why not Assam?…Why not North East?”

Senior Advocate D S Naidu, appearing for the ECI, said he had not been served a copy of the petition and was clueless about the grievance.

Banerjee also accused the Commission of violating the SC’s orders. “We are happy that this court gave order that Aadhaar card will be one of the included documents, But they said no. In other states, domicile certificate is allowed, family register card is allowed, government housing card is allowed, health card is allowed, caste certificate is allowed. They only targeted Bengal on the eve of elections… After 24 years, what was the hurry to do… what takes two years, only within three months. Even when the festival season is there, when the harvest season is there, when people are not in a mood to be in the city, they are outside, they are travelling, at that time they have issued all these notices,” she said.

The CJI said the Court had reserved its decision on petitions challenging the constitutional validity of the SIR process and, therefore, would not be able to comment on her statements on Aadhaar. “SIR matter was being argued before us for the last two months. And we have reserved our judgment. Therefore, we are not in a position to comment on the credibility, credence, or the extent of the Aadhaar card,” he said.