New Delhi, Jan. 20 -- The Supreme Court on Monday stepped in to alleviate the "stress and strain" faced by ordinary voters during West Bengal's special intensive revision (SIR) of electoral rolls, issuing a slew of binding directions to the Election Commission of India (ECI) to make the process transparent, accessible and voter-friendly, and reiterating that the core purpose of the exercise was to ensure that no eligible voter is excluded. The move, welcomed by Bengal's ruling Trinamool Congress, is likely to set a precedent for similar revision exercises that are being carried out in other states. Across the 12 states and Union territories where the exercise is being carried out, the names of a little over 70 million people have been excised from the rolls, although an HT analysis found that most of the deletions were in regions that have seen significant additions over the past decade-and-half, suggesting that a process of de-duplication is underway. In addition, in the second phase of verification, the Election Commission is issuing notices wherever there are some discrepancies - this process is underway in West Bengal - and the Supreme Court has directed that the names of everyone being issued a notice be published. "See the strain and stress going on for ordinary people. Over one crore (10 million) people have been issued notices.we are going to pass some orders.Any correction that is to be done must be done transparently by giving a fair opportunity of hearing without causing any inconvenience to those in the list," observed a bench led by Chief Justice of India Surya Kant, underlining that while corrective measures in electoral rolls were permissible, they could not come at the cost of fairness, due process and voter confidence. The bench, also comprising justices Dipankar Datta and Joymalya Bagchi, was hearing a batch of petitions challenging the SIR process in the poll-bound state, amid a fierce political battle between the Mamata Banerjee-led Trinamool Congress (TMC) government and the ECI. In a move that significantly strengthens procedural safeguards for affected voters, the court's order ensured that those issued notices over alleged discrepancies receive proper intimation, adequate assistance and a meaningful opportunity to substantiate their credentials. With hearing venues now significantly expanded and written receipts made mandatory for submissions, the court sought to eliminate allegations of uncertainty and arbitrariness in the process. Taking note of concerns over notices citing vague "logical discrepancies", the court directed ECI to publish the list of all persons to whom such notices have been issued. These lists must be displayed at panchayat and block offices, the bench said, to ensure transparency and public accountability. The bench recorded that around 1.25 crore (12.5 million) notices had been issued flagging discrepancies such as spelling variations in names, low age gaps between parents and children, and instances where parents were shown as having more than six children. To reduce hardship and make the process genuinely accessible, the court further directed that affected voters must be allowed to submit documents or objections with the assistance of one representative, who could be a relative, neighbour or even a political party's booth level agent, provided a signed or thumb-marked authority letter is produced. If documents are found unsatisfactory, voters must be granted a personal hearing, which can also be attended by the authorised representative. Responding to complaints that voters were being forced to travel long distances, the bench ordered that offices for submission of claims and objections be set up at panchayat bhavans or block offices. Importantly, election officials were directed to issue written receipts or certifications acknowledging the submission of documents or the conduct of hearings, providing voters with tangible proof of compliance. Addressing ECI's apprehension of possible violence during hearings, the court placed responsibility squarely on the state administration. District collectors and superintendents of Police (SPs) were directed to deploy adequate staff and force at the centres, while the director general of Police (DGP) of West Bengal was made personally responsible to ensure that "no law and order situation" arises and that the entire process is completed smoothly. "Let us make sure that the exercise is timely, and that persons must be given a fair opportunity," the bench said. Under the SIR exercise, "logical discrepancies" are categorised into seven types, including cases of voters mapped to more than six progeny; an age gap of less than 15 years with parents; individuals aged over 45 missing from the 2002 rolls; mismatches in fathers' names between the 2002 and 2005 lists; age gaps under 40 years with grandparents; age gaps over 50 years with parents; and gender mismatches with the 2002 list. Senior advocate Kapil Sibal, appearing for TMC leaders Derek O'Brien and Dola Sen, argued that trivial spelling variations in surnames such as "Ganguly" or "Datta" were being treated as discrepancies, and that notices had been issued even where the age gap between parents and children was less than 15 years. "Why is it a logical discrepancy? How can a 15-year age gap between mother and son be a logical discrepancy?" the court asked ECI, pointing out that child marriages were not uncommon in India. Senior advocates Rakesh Dwivedi and Maninder Singh, appearing for ECI, said officers had been instructed not to issue notices for spelling variations, but conceded that cases involving age gaps of 15 years or less had been flagged. He also contended that booth level agents, being political party members, could not insist on attending every hearing, though a voter was free to authorise any representative, including a BLA. Senior advocates Shyam Divan and Kalyan Banerjee supported the petitioners' case. Divan alleged that critical field-level instructions were being conveyed through WhatsApp messages instead of formal written orders, undermining transparency, while Banerjee claimed that notices had even been issued to prominent individuals, including Nobel laureate Amartya Sen and sitting MPs, raising concerns of voter profiling. Dwivedi rejected the allegations, remarking: "If ECI is to be distrusted, let not ECI hold elections at all." The case unfolds against the backdrop of an escalating political confrontation between ECI and Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee, whose government has fiercely opposed the SIR exercise, alleging that it is a ploy to delete the names of legitimate voters ahead of the upcoming assembly elections. "The factor of 'logical discrepancy' was not mentioned at the beginning of the SIR process. It was introduced later with the sole intention of deleting the names of genuine voters," Banerjee has alleged. Following Monday's hearing, TMC MP Abhishek Banerjee welcomed the Supreme Court's intervention, posting on X: "We wholeheartedly welcome the landmark direction of the Supreme Court to the Election Commission. This much-needed intervention has dealt a decisive blow to the CRUEL, POLITICALLY MOTIVATED and deeply UNJUST SIR process." "The SC has rightly ordered that the names of those arbitrarily slapped with the vague, sinister label of 'Logical Discrepancy' must be publicly published. The BJP-ECI combine has been exposed for the BANGLA-BIRODHI ZAMINDARS they are," he added. The proceedings stem from applications moved by TMC MPs, following which the Supreme Court on January 12 sought a response from ECI on their plea seeking an extension of the deadline for filing claims and objections by nearly 58 lakh (5.8 million) voters whose names were deleted from the draft electoral roll. The MPs alleged that West Bengal's SIR process sharply departed from procedures followed in Bihar, claiming that an undisclosed software was used to identify discrepancies instead of on-ground verification by booth level officers. They also objected to informal instructions allegedly issued via WhatsApp, restrictions on BLA participation, and hearings being held at distant administrative centres rather than village-level locations. The draft electoral roll for West Bengal, published on December 16, 2025, recorded the deletion of 5.82 million names, reducing the electorate to 70.8 million from 76.6 million following the 2025 special summary revision. Meanwhile, ECI extended the deadline for filing claims and objections under SIR from January 15 to January 19, with January 1, 2026, remaining the qualifying date. The extension applied to West Bengal, Goa, Lakshadweep, Rajasthan and Puducherry....