E-Paper
Protect democracy, urges Mamata as she becomes 1st CM to argue own case in SC
West Bengal chief minister Mamata Banerjee claimed that millions of voters risk being deleted from the electoral roll over minor spelling and dialect-based discrepancies
Mamata Banerjee on Wednesday became the first sitting chief minister to personally argue her own petition in the Supreme Court, urging the court to “protect democracy” and “people’s lives”, as she claimed that millions of voters risk being deleted from the electoral roll over minor spelling and dialect-based discrepancies during the ongoing special intensive revision (SIR) in poll-bound West Bengal.
A bench headed by Chief Justice of India Surya Kant, with justices Joymalya Bagchi and Vipul M Pancholi, sought a response from the Election Commission of India (ECI) on whether notices issued on such minor discrepancies should be withdrawn, cautioned the poll body to act “carefully”, and fixed the matter for further hearing on February 9. The court directed the West Bengal government to suggest a list of officers conversant with local dialects who could assist the ECI in resolving errors without excluding genuine voters.
The hearing marked an extraordinary departure from convention, with Banerjee herself rising to address the bench alongside senior advocate Shyam Divan, who led arguments on her behalf. The chief minister repeatedly stressed that she was not fighting for her party but for ordinary voters who, she claimed, were being unfairly targeted through a rushed verification process.
“I belong to that state… When justice is crying behind closed doors, we felt we are not getting justice anywhere. I am not fighting for my party. Please protect democracy. Please protect people’s lives,” Banerjee told the court, alleging that the ECI’s exercise disproportionately targeted West Bengal ahead of the 2026 assembly elections.
Opening arguments, Divan argued that most discrepancies arose from minor spelling variations, pronunciation differences due to regional dialects, or routine life events such as women changing surnames after marriage.
The bench acknowledged the concern, noting that such discrepancies were common across the country and observed that genuine voters could not be excluded for dialect or pronunciation-related differences.
Seeking permission to intervene, Banerjee mounted a sharp critique of what she described as a deletion-driven exercise. “They call it a mismatch even after a woman changes her surname after marriage. Poor people shift houses, buy small flats, and suddenly they are deleted,” she alleged. She also claimed that despite earlier Supreme Court directions, voters continued to be removed under the guise of “incorrect mapping”.
Questioning what she called selective targeting, Banerjee asked, “Why Bengal? Why not Assam?” She alleged that the ECI was attempting to compress it into two months, a process that normally takes years.
She objected to the deployment of micro-observers allegedly from BJP-ruled states, remarking that the poll panel had turned into a “WhatsApp Commission”, a comment that prompted the bench to assure that safeguards could be devised if necessary.
Reiterating that the court’s primary concern was voter protection, the bench said, “Every problem has a solution. No innocent citizen should be left out.” It asked the state to propose officers familiar with Bengali naming conventions and dialects to assist the ECI, cautioning the poll body against mechanically issuing notices. “Sensitise your officers. Do not issue notices to notable authors and poets for nothing,” it told the ECI’s counsel.
Senior advocate Gopal Sankaranarayan, who appeared for Sahitya Akademi awardee Joy Goswami, another petitioner, underscored concerns over indiscriminate notices.
For the ECI, senior advocates DS Naidu and Rakesh Dwivedi sought time to respond, though the bench warned against delay given the tight SIR timeline.
Issuing notice on the petitions filed by Banerjee and Goswami, the court directed the ECI to respond specifically to the withdrawal of notices issued over minor discrepancies and asked the state to submit its list of assisting officers. As proceedings concluded, Banerjee thanked the bench, making a final plea: “Please protect people’s lives.”
