New Delhi: The Trinamool Congress (TMC), on Monday, claimed before the Supreme Court that deletions of names of voters in the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) materially affected the results in certain Assembly constituencies in West Bengal.
TMC MP and senior advocate Kalyan Banerjee told the bench of Chief Justice of India Surya Kant and Justice Joymalya Bagchi that the BJP’s winning margin in 31 constituencies was less than the number of persons deleted in the SIR process, LiveLaw reported.
He also claimed that in many cases, the deletions and the loss margin were almost the same.
Banerjee referred to a candidate who lost by 862 votes in a constituency where over 5,432 persons were removed from the rolls for adjudication. The vote gap between the TMC and the BJP was nearly 32 lakhs, and nearly 35 lakh appeals were pending before the appellate tribunals, he claimed.
He also referred to an earlier observation made by Justice Bagchi that if the winning margin was less than the number of deleted voters, then the matter may require judicial examination, as reported by Hindustan Times.
The submissions were opposed by the Election Commission, which said that the remedy was an election petition and that the poll panel could be held accountable for issues related to the SIR and consequential appeals against the addition or deletion of votes.
The Court bench then said that former West Bengal chief minister Mamata Banerjee and others can file fresh applications regarding their claims.
“Whatever you want to say about results…which may have materially affected because of deletions which are under adjudication…that requires an independent Interlocutory Application (IA),” Justice Bagchi said.
Senior advocate Menaka Guruswamy also submitted that at the present rate, the appellate tribunals will take at least 4 years to dispose of the appeals. The CJI said that the priority will be to ensure that appeals are decided expeditiously.
“We indicated to you…subsequent event: you are at liberty to file an IA. Mr Naidu (the EC lawyer)’s objection will come as a counter. We will look into it and pass the order. On pendency of appeals – report from Hon’ble CJ (of Calcutta High Court) required…to take stock in what timeline they can be resolved,” Justice Bagchi added.
