Bengal Mamata Banerjee sat on a bench in the last row of the Supreme Court’s court No.1 For more than three hours for the three-judge bench to take up her petition challenging the ongoing special intensive revision (SIR) of electoral rolls in poll-bound Bengal.

The bench was led by Chief Justice of India Surya Kant and also included Justice Joymalya Bagchi and Justice Vipul M. Pancholi.

The court No. 1 was packed with lawyers and litigants eager to watch Mamata arguing on her petition before the CJI-led bench.

“May I explain you, sir? May I explain you, sir? Because I belong to that state… no, sir. No, sir. I am very grateful because of your kindness,” Mamata, who earned her degree in law from Calcutta’s Jogesh Chandra Law College, said in her first appearance in the country’s top court, addressing CJI Kant.

The Trinamool’s leader in the Rajya Sabha, Derek O’Brien, and his colleague in the Upper House Dola Sen had filed petitions against the SIR in the apex court, which was heard on January 19.

Mamata, who has been camping in Delhi for the last four days, had filed another petition on her arrival at the capital before the apex court challenging the SIR exercise.

Senior advocate Shyam Divan, the chief minister’s counsel in the case, had opened the argument before the bench. Senior counsels Kapil Sibal and Abhishek Manu Singhvi, who have appeared for the Trinamool, the Bengal government and even individual Trinamool leaders in multiple cases, attended the hearing virtually.

While Divan made his submissions before the court, Mamata stood along with Trinamool’s Serampore MP and senior counsel, Kalyan Bandyopadhyay, keenly watching the proceedings.

The CJI suggested that the state government provide a team well conversant in Bangla to assist the Election Commission in matching the names on the electoral rolls and the forms submitted.

Around 1.36 crore voters in Bengal have been marked under “logical discrepancy”, a criteria that the Trinamool alleges is being used only in Bengal and not the 11 other states and Union territories where the SIR process is on.

Hearing the CJI speak, Mamata said: “Sir, the problem is always our lawyers fight a case and they are fighting from the beginning. But, sir, when everything is finished, when we are not getting justice, when justice is crying behind the door – I am quoting Rabindranath Tagore – then we thought we are not getting justice anywhere. So many times… I have written six letters to Election Commission including all the details, but no reply, sir. I am the bonded labour, sir, maybe.”

Supreme Court senior advocate Sanjay Hegde recalled that Sheila Dikshit when she was Delhi chief minister in the early 2000s, had appeared in the Supreme Court in person before then Chief Justice of India B.N. Kirpal in a case related to the conversion of DTC buses to compressed natural gas (CNG).

“The chief minister went prepared with notes for her argument before the three-Judge bench-led by the CJI,” Kalyan Bandyopadhyay told The Telegraph Online. “We lawyers do that. She too did the same.”

Decades ago, Mamata had appeared in a district court in South Dinajpur’s Balurghat. Sources close to her said she had never appeared to argue before either Calcutta High Court or the apex court.

In the Supreme Court on Wednesday, Mamata submitted photographs from newspapers, gave examples of women who changed their surnames post-marriage and now find themselves in the crosshairs of the SIR process, the alleged SIR-related suicides of both electors and booth level officers (BLOs) in the state, the exclusion of documents provided by the state government and Aadhaar for verification.

CJI Kant informed the lawyer-chief minister: “Regarding Aadhaar. SIR validity issue we have reserved judgment and thus we cannot comment on the issue. Aadhaar card has its own limitations. Now on the discrepancy part is to give a team of officers and let the Election Commission take them to verify and see how names are mismatched.”

“Also, to ECI… please send notices carefully; you cannot put out notable authors etc,” CJI Kant said at one point.

The chief minister argued that the Election Commission had sent micro-observers to Bengal who had pushed the electoral registration officers (ERO) to the sidelines.

“The SIR process is only for deletion, not inclusion,” she said.

She also asked in the Supreme Court why poll-bound Assam was left out from the states where the SIR exercise is on.

Senior advocate Rakesh Dwivedi, appearing on behalf of the Election Commission, accused the Bengal government of not providing an adequate number of officials to assist the poll panel in preparing the electoral rolls.

The Supreme Court bench issued notices to both the state and the commission and has asked both the parties to submit their replies by February 9, when the matter will be heard again.

As the hearing for the day concluded, Mamata appealed to the apex court: “Please protect the people’s rights.”

Bengal BJP president and Rajya Sabha MP Samik Bhattacharya said the Trinamool government was working to ensure the SIR process did not succeed in Bengal.

“The BLOs appointed by the state are being threatened to upload fake documents,” Bhattacharya said. “She is a chief minister who has taken oath over the Constitution yet she is abusing the EC.

“Her days are numbered,” Bhattacharya added. “The people of Bengal have decided they will not allow this government to continue.”