West Bengal Voter List Anomalies “Scientifically Impossible”, EC Informs Supreme Court

West Bengal Electoral Roll Discrepancies ‘Defy Science’, EC Informs Supreme Court

The Election Commission of India (ECI) has informed the Supreme Court that several “logical discrepancies” detected in West Bengal’s electoral rolls during the ongoing Special Intensive Revision (SIR) exercise are scientifically implausible, raising serious concerns about the accuracy of voter data.

In an affidavit filed ahead of the resumed hearing on Wednesday, January 21, 2026, the ECI cited striking examples from the State’s electoral database. According to the Commission, two electors were listed as having more than 200 children, seven electors with over 100 children, 10 with more than 50 children, and another 10 with over 40 children. Such data, the Commission argued, “defies science” and cannot be accepted as valid voter-family mappings.

The Supreme Court resumed hearing petitions filed by leaders of the Trinamool Congress, who have alleged irregularities in the conduct of the SIR in West Bengal. The petitioners claim that the revision exercise has resulted in large-scale exclusions from the electoral rolls, potentially disenfranchising genuine voters.

Earlier, on January 19, the apex court had strongly criticised the Election Commission for the “stress and strain” caused to ordinary citizens due to the ongoing verification process. The court noted that approximately 1.36 crore people—nearly 20% of West Bengal’s population—have received notices seeking explanations for alleged discrepancies related to their names, addresses, or family details in the electoral rolls.

While the current hearings focus on procedural concerns and alleged irregularities in West Bengal, the Supreme Court has clarified that it will separately examine the constitutionality of the electoral roll revision exercise being carried out in several States.

The case is being closely watched, as it raises broader questions about voter verification, data accuracy, and the balance between electoral integrity and the protection of citizens’ voting rights.