In an unprecedented move, the Supreme Court on Friday decided to depute judicial officers in West Bengal to adjudicate claims of voters listed under the “logical discrepancy” category in the ongoing special intensive revision (SIR) exercise, acknowledging that this was an extraordinary decision in view of the extraordinary circumstances.

A three-judge bench led by Chief Justice of India Surya Kant noted the “trust deficit” and an “unfortunate blame game” between the elected state government and the Election Commission of India (ECI) and underlined the significance of completing the SIR exercise before the state elections a few months later.

“We are left with hardly another option but to request the chief justice of the Calcutta high court to spare some serving judicial officers, along with former judicial officers with impeccable integrity, in the rank of additional district judge or district judge, who can then, in each district, be requested to revisit or dispose of claims under the category of logical discrepancy,” the bench comprising justices Joymalya Bagchi and Vipul M Panchol said.

“The circumstances being extraordinary, the request for entrustment to judicial officers or former judicial officers is also of an extraordinary nature,” the bench said, noting that it was important to ensure “fairness in adjudication of genuineness of documents” that would determine inclusion and exclusion of voters in the state’s electoral roll.

SIR was rolled out in Bengal on November 4, 2025. The draft electoral roll, published on December 16 last year, excised 5.8 million, and another 11.6 million were flagged under the controversial “logical discrepancy”. ECI has conducted 660,000 hearings, and the final rolls are set to be published on February 28.

The bench referred to the back-and-forth between the state government and the ECI over providing eligible officers to adjudicate claims/objections submitted by close to 13.6 million voters. “There is an unfortunate blame game, allegations and counter allegations which clearly depict a trust deficit between two constitutional functionaries, namely a democratically elected government in the state and the ECI.”