West Bengal SIR| Supreme Court permits appellate tribunal to consider fresh documents

New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Wednesday said that even if a person is excluded from electoral rolls in West Bengal and is unable to vote in the upcoming assembly election, such exclusion, if later found unjustified by the tribunal headed by a former Chief Justice, can be remedied.

A bench led by Chief Justice of India Surya Kant clarified that the court was not suggesting that every tribunal decision delivered on the final day must automatically be incorporated. However, where rulings extend beyond the cut-off, inclusion in the supplementary list may not be feasible.

The court emphasised that such rights cannot be permanently extinguished, warning that denying them altogether would create an “extremely oppressive situation.” The court permitted appellate tribunals to consider fresh documents in electoral roll disputes, but only after verifying their authenticity.

The bench, also comprising Justices Joymalya Bagchi and Vipul M Pancholi, said that if possible, whenever a person approaches for an appeal, he may be supplied with the reason or arrangements.

Senior advocate Kapil Sibal, for the petitioners, agreed with the court’s observation. The EC's counsel said that the poll panel will place the whole record before the appellate authority.

“The appellate authority will have the right to share it with the aggrieved person and also anyone who is participating. Wherever there is a dispute regarding the genuineness, authenticity or validity of a document, let the tribunal verify it from the official record. They must ascertain the genuineness of these documents,” the bench said.

A counsel asked the court to direct the tribunal authority to consider the documents or records which will be supplied by the applicant and stressed that clarification is required. He added that otherwise the appellate tribunal will go by the documents which are not there.

The bench said that on the last occasion, the court made certain comments without being aware of the software's architecture, which provides a field where officers concerned give remarks and reasons regarding whether the logical discrepancy was justified and deletion warranted, or if it was not justified.

The bench said that in such cases, whenever an appeal is filed by an aggrieved person—be it the EC representative who feels inclusion is unjustified or the person being excluded—the reason shall be supplied to the person concerned.

The bench said this could be based on documents already present regarding their authenticity or any other unimpeachable document.

The court said that the EC is looking at two different and independent exercises: one is the list on which the election will be held, and the other is the vital constitutional right to vote.

The EC's counsel submitted there should be a cutoff date for inclusion or exclusion, it cannot be beyond the date of nominations. Otherwise, it will be an unending process.

The bench noted that approximately 47.4 lakh objections out of a total of 60 lakh have been disposed of as of March 31. The court took note of two communications received from the Chief Justice of the Calcutta High Court updating the progress of the exercise.

“We are quite happy and very optimistic about the facts and figures,” the CJI said, noting that nearly 1.75 lakh to 2 lakh objections are being adjudicated daily.

Petitioners raised concerns about bulk Form 6 applications (for registration as new voters) being filed. However, the bench said that it cannot merely act on oral submissions without anything being on record.

It was informed that the EC has notified the constitution of 19 appellate tribunals, headed by former high court chief justices and judges, to hear appeals against inclusion or exclusion from voter lists. The court fixed the matter, concerning SIR in WB, for the hearing on April 6.