Bengal voters cleared by the appellate tribunals on or before April 21 can vote in the first phase on April 23, and those cleared by April 27 can do so during the second phase on April 29, the Supreme Court has said.
Conversely, in instances where the tribunals allow appeals against the inclusion of voters, they cannot vote in this Bengal election.
The order, relating to the April 13 hearing but formally uploaded on Thursday, relaxes the existing deadlines of April 6 and 9 for voter inclusion in the rolls for the first and second phases, respectively.
The Election Commission will now have to issue fresh supplementary lists for the first and second phases by April 21 and April 27, including and excluding voters who have had their cases decided by the tribunals, the court said.
By the time the April 9 deadline ended, the appellate tribunals — which had not till then become fully functional — had heard and cleared only four among the 27,16,393 people excluded from the rolls following adjudication by judicial officers.
It remained unclear on Thursday how much difference on the ground the latest order might make. Poll panel officials said that while the tribunals had begun functioning from their offices since April 12 — with a two-day break on April 14 and 15 — there was no information on how fast, if at all, they were hearing and deciding cases.
They added that allowing or disallowing people to vote just two days after the tribunals include or exclude them would present a logistical challenge, and might cause widespread confusion on polling day.
In all, 34.35 lakh appeals are pending before the 19 appellate tribunals, including more than 7 lakh appeals against inclusions.
On April 13, neither the oral observations nor the short order dictated by the bench of Chief Justice Surya Kant and Justice Joymalya Bagchi had hinted at a deadline relaxation for voter
inclusion.
The court had on that day rejected pleas from a group of excluded voters to allow all those whose appeals were pending before the tribunals to vote in this Bengal
election.
The uploaded order stuck to that decision.
“…If an appeal is allowed by the Appellate Tribunal and a conclusive direction for inclusion or exclusion is issued, such directions shall be duly effectuated prior to the State of West Bengal proceeding to polling on 23.04.2026 or 29.04.2026, as the case may be,” the order said.
“We, therefore… direct the ECI that, wherever the Appellate Tribunals are able to decide the appeals by 21.04.2026 or 27.04.2026, as the case may be, such appellate orders shall be given effect to by issuing a supplementary revised electoral roll, and all necessary consequences with respect to the right to vote shall follow,” the order added.
“However, it goes without saying that the mere pendency of appeals preferred by excluded persons before the Appellate Tribunals shall not entitle them to exercise their right to vote.
“If such a scenario were to be permitted… objectors may likewise seek denial of the right to vote to those individuals whose names appear in the revised electoral roll, but against whom such objectors have preferred appeals.”
The petitioners had argued that people should not be stripped of their constitutional right to vote just because the poll panel and the tribunals could not finish their tasks in time. But the apex court said such a move would nullify the work of the judicial officers, who “have completed what can only be described as a truly Herculean task within a remarkably short span of time”.
It underlined that “upon verification by the Judicial Officers entrusted with such exercise pursuant to the directions of this Court, the petitioners have been found to be not genuine”.
“We say so because such verification displaces the presumption of correctness that was attached to their prior inclusion, particularly when viewed in light of the fact that the exercise has been undertaken by a neutral body, comprising presently, serving Judicial Officers,” the court said.
It stressed that the tribunals had been asked to decide the appeals “by revisiting the entire record, including the reasons assigned by the Judicial Officers while deciding the objections”. “They were also required to duly communicate the reasons for their decisions to the concerned parties,” the bench said. “As on date, the Appellate Tribunals are fully functional.”