'Won’t tolerate questioning judicial officers’: Supreme Court on Bengal electoral roll revision pleas

New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Tuesday voiced strong discontent with the filing of certain applications in respect of the pendency of claims before judicial officers involved in the special intensive revision (SIR) of electoral rolls in West Bengal.

The court made it clear that judicial officers will include genuine voters and exclude those found to be intruders and unauthorised. The court, however, ordered notifying the appellate tribunal to hear appeals arising from the SIR process.

Senior advocate Menaka Guruswamy for the applicants contended before a bench led by Chief Justice of India Surya Kant that there are roughly 48 lakh mapped voters who are under adjudication.

“They are mapped because they were on the 2002 roll. They have voted in consecutive elections, including the last parliamentary election; these are genuine bona fide voters," she claimed.

"That is why the SIR," the bench said.

"The judicial officers are on the job, and those are genuine bona fide voters; they will include. Those found to be intruders, unauthorised (won't be included)," the bench added.

The counsel insisted that the exercise has to be completed.

The bench, also comprising Justices R Mahadevan and Joymalya Bagchi, said the judicial officers are doing the exercise.

Guruswamy insisted that he exercise the adjudication of 50 lakh, out of which 48 lakh are mapped, and it has to be completed.

The court pointed out that the plea sought directions to the Election Commission to withdraw all additional cases for review given to the judicial officers, which is completely contrary to the order passed.

The court made it categorical that it would not tolerate attempts to question the integrity of judicial officers.

"Your application is premature, and it shows as if you don’t have trust," the bench said, adding that it would not tolerate anybody questioning the judicial officers.

The court said it is a request to both sides to ensure the smooth discharge of duties by judicial officers.

Senior advocate D S Naidu for the EC said judicial officers are undertaking a huge task.

The court said technical disruptions in the EC's portal would be looked into, and it should be ensured that no such disruptions take place.

"Please help in the smooth discharge of duties," the bench told the EC.

The bench also noted a communication received from the Chief Justice of the Calcutta High Court stated that 10.16 lakh objections had been disposed of as of the evening of March 9.

Over 500 judicial officers are working to complete the SIR exercise. The bench was informed that login IDs had been created by March 8, 2026, to facilitate the smooth mobilisation and redeployment of judicial officers in certain sensitive districts.

The bench said the technical issues causing disruptions prior to March 7, will be effectively addressed, and new login IDs will be created as required by judicial officers.

The bench asked the poll panel to ensure that no mandatory step that can disrupt the SIR process is introduced unless approved by the Calcutta High Court chief justice.

The bench said the Chief Justice of the Calcutta High Court may request some former Chief Justice and some two or three former judges of the high court, preferably from Calcutta HC or neighbouring states, who would be notified as the appellate tribunal. The bench said the EC may notify them as an appellate tribunal to hear appeals arising from the SIR process.

The tribunal will hear appeals against exclusions in the West Bengal SIR process. The bench issued this direction after concerns were raised about the absence of an independent appellate mechanism.

The petitioners' counsel raised issues of the mechanism of appeal available to persons whose claims are rejected by the judicial officers, and the publication of supplementary lists of persons whose objections have already been disposed of, particularly in view of the large number of objections.

While ordering for appellate tribunals, the bench also said that decisions of the judicial officers cannot be examined in appeals by any administrative officers of the EC.