In the West Bengal SIR matter, the Supreme Court was today told that the winning margin of BJP candidates in certain assembly constituencies was significantly less compared to the total number of voters deleted from the voter lists.

Senior Advocate Kalyan Bandhopadhyay, for a Trinamool Congress member, submitted that an application has been filed pointing out that in 31 constituencies, the winning margin of the BJP against the TMC was less than the number of votes deleted. To illustrate, in AC-145, the margin of loss was 401, and the deletions were 8785. In another constituency, the loss was by 316 votes, whereas the deletions were more.

Responding to the submission, CJI Surya Kant said, "you can file the application [on this], but can the Court direct fresh elections like this?" The CJI further asked if any election petitions had been filed in the 31 constituencies challenging the election of the returned candidates.

Bandhopadhyay that election petitions had been filed in some cases, but not all.

Justice Joymalya Bagchi, also part of the bench alongside CJI Kant and Justice V Mohana, then asked how many excluded persons had actually preferred appeals against their exclusion.

If the person has accepted the deletion, then the exercise would be academic, the Judge said. "So what we need to see is, let us say 100 people have been deleted, and the winning margin is 50, and the number of deleted persons filing appeals is 60 or 70, then the challenge to deletion becomes substantial. When the election result is subject to a decision by us, in a particular case, it may become very relevant," Justice Bagchi said. Bandhopadhyay replied that the ECI has not furnished the data regarding the assembly-wise appeals. "The difficulty we are facing is ECI is not giving data in public domain. I am not getting any statistics," he said.

The bench said that it will not confine itself to only these 31 constituencies and will examine the entire pending appeals to ensure their timely disposal.The judge noted that lakhs of appeals against exclusion/inclusion were stated to be pending and deemed it necessary to furnish details to the Court regarding disposal of the said appeals.

Case Title: Mostari Banu v. Election Commission of India and Ors, W.P.(C) No. 1089/2025 (and connected cases)

Also from today's hearing : West Bengal SIR | 80% Appeals In Tribunals Challenge Voter Inclusion; Appeals Against Exclusion Need Priority, Supreme Court Told

From April hearing- West Bengal SIR |'If Winning Margin Is 2 % & 15% Couldn't Vote?' : Justice Bagchi Raises Concerns, Says ECI Deviated From Bihar Stance