TMC raised concerns in the Supreme Court regarding Bengal’s election results. The party said voter cuts during Special Intensive Revision (SIR) significantly affected victory margins. TMC believes these cuts influenced several constituencies, leading to skewed outcomes.
Bengal Election Results and SIR Impact
In their petition, TMC explained that the reduced victory margins were lower than the number of removed voters. They argued that this had a considerable effect on the overall election results. The party highlighted how SIR had disrupted specific constituencies, adding to the controversy.
Supreme Court’s Directive on New Petitions
The Supreme Court allowed TMC to file new petitions on this issue. Chief Justice Uday Umesh Lalit and Justice Joymalya Bagchi approved the motion. TMC claimed that the cuts, under SIR, had a significant influence on the assembly seat outcomes.
TMC’s Claims On Voter Cut Impact
TMC spokesperson Kalyan Bandopadhyay argued that the differences in votes between TMC and BJP were approximately 32 lakh. He pointed out that nearly 35 lakh appeals were pending before the Appellate Tribunal. Bandopadhyay noted that if the victory margin was less than the removed voters, the issue might require judicial examination.
Justice Bagchi’s Intervention
Justice Bagchi called for a more detailed inquiry. He advised Bandopadhyay to file an interlocutory application, providing essential details for an independent investigation. Justice Bagchi also stressed that an independent inquiry (IA) was necessary to understand the full impact of these voter removals.
Additional Political and Legal Drama
Bandopadhyay also mentioned that former HC Chief Justice TS Shivgananam had resigned from the Appellate Tribunal. When questioned by the court, Bandopadhyay said they could not force anyone to stay. The court focused on resolving the pending appeals quickly.
CJI Calls For Quick Resolution
CJI Uday Umesh Lalit emphasized the need to resolve appeals swiftly. Senior advocate Menaka Guruswamy shared concerns that the Appellate Tribunal could take four years to resolve cases if the current pace continued. The situation is already putting pressure on the electoral process.
Election Commission’s Stand on Petition
Election Commission’s lawyer Dama Sheshadri Naidu argued that the appropriate route for resolution is through an election petition. Bandopadhyay requested that the bench order the deletion of SIR as a basis for filing such petitions.
Legal Complexities Around SIR
CJI Lalit questioned how they could issue such an order. However, the bench assured that if proper applications were filed, they would investigate the matter. Justice Bagchi acknowledged that if the IA was filed correctly, they would proceed with the necessary orders.
Pending Appeals and Timeline Concerns
The bench instructed that a report from CJI regarding the timeline for resolving the pending appeals was required. This will ensure that the case is addressed in a timely manner. The case was adjourned until further progress.
