New Delhi: In a significant move to ensure transparency in the electoral process, the Supreme Court of India on Monday directed the Election Commission of India (ECI) to publicly display the names of approximately 1.25 crore voters in West Bengal who have been flagged for "logical discrepancies."

A three-judge Bench comprising Chief Justice of India (CJI) Surya Kant, Justice Dipankar Datta, and Justice Joymalya Bagchi passed several directions to ease the "stress" on citizens currently undergoing the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls in the state.

The controversy centers around the ECI’s ongoing intensive verification process. Out of nearly two crore notices issued, about 1.25 crore fall under a category called "logical discrepancy." This category, based on algorithmic checks, flags voters for:

Mismatches in fathers' or parents' names.
Age gaps between parents and children that the system deems "illogical" (e.g., less than 15 years or more than 50 years).
Inconsistencies in the age of grandparents.

Senior Advocate Kapil Sibal, appearing for the petitioners, argued that these criteria were arbitrary and being used to exclude genuine voters. He pointed out that even minor spelling variations in Bengali surnames, like "Ganguly" or "Datta," were resulting in notices.

During the hearing, the Bench expressed concern over the rigid application of these "logical" rules. When the ECI counsel, Senior Advocate Rakesh Dwivedi, argued that a 15-year age gap between parent and child warranted scrutiny, Justice Joymalya Bagchi remarked:

"How can a 15-year age gap between mother and son be a logical discrepancy? We are not in a country where child marriages are not a reality."

The Court emphasized that while correcting the rolls is necessary, it should not become a tool for harassment.

One of the sharpest rebukes from the Court was directed at the ECI's method of communication. The petitioners highlighted that crucial instructions—including those barring Booth Level Agents (BLAs) from assisting voters—were being sent via WhatsApp rather than through official circulars.

CJI Surya Kant was firm on this point:

"There is no question of running everything through WhatsApp. A circular has to be issued."

The Court noted that formal processes are essential for accountability and transparency in a democratic exercise of this scale.

To protect voters and streamline the verification process, the Bench issued the following mandatory directions:

Public Disclosure: The ECI must display the names of all 1.25 crore persons in the 'logical discrepancy' list at Gram Panchayat Bhavans, Block Offices, and Ward Offices.
Extended Timeline: Citizens have 10 days from the date of publication to file objections, with additional time granted for submitting supporting documents.
Right to Representation: Voters can be represented at hearings by authorized persons, including Booth Level Agents (BLAs), lawyers, family members, or neighbors.
Acceptance of Documents: The Court specifically directed that Class 10 (Madhyamik) admit cards or certificates must be accepted as valid proof of age/identity.
Official Receipts: Authorities must provide a formal receipt for all documents received and must provide written reasons for their final decisions on any objections.
State Support: The West Bengal government must provide adequate manpower and ensure law and order at verification centers to handle the massive crowd.

The scale of the exercise was further highlighted when the Court was informed that even Nobel Laureate Amartya Sen, as well as several sitting Members of Parliament, had been issued notices under this revision process. This led to heated exchanges between counsel, with the Bench reiterating that the law must be applied reasonably to everyone.

With Assembly Elections in West Bengal approaching, the cleanup of the electoral roll has become a major legal and political flashpoint. The Supreme Court’s intervention ensures that the "Special Intensive Revision" remains a corrective measure rather than an exclusionary one.

The Court concluded by stating it would continue to monitor the situation and "issue directions where needed" to ensure no genuine citizen is disenfranchised due to algorithmic errors or procedural lapses.