More than a month after the conclusion of the West Bengal Assembly elections, the Supreme Court on Thursday (June 18) expressed prima facie satisfaction that a 75-year-old advocate from Murshidabad whose name was struck off the electoral rolls during the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) appeared to be a legitimate voter, raising fresh questions over the exercise that resulted in the deletion of nearly 90 lakh names.

According to Live Law, the apex court granted an out-of-turn hearing to the appeal filed by Mohammad Yean Ali, whose name had been removed despite his long history as a voter.

The proceedings come after the elections and the formation of the new government, events in which many excluded voters were unable to participate. Around 27 lakh people whose names were deleted are still awaiting adjudication of their cases.

Hearing the case, a bench comprising Chief Justice of India Surya Kant and Justice V. Mohana noted that the petitioner had been practising law since 1977 and appeared to be a resident of the state.

“Prima facie we are agreeing with you that you appear to be a genuine bona fide citizen of West Bengal,” the CJI remarked, as per the Live Law report.

The court, however, stopped short of immediately restoring Ali’s name to the electoral roll.

Appearing for Ali, advocate Shakil Shaikh told the court that his client had been exercising his franchise for over five decades and had never previously faced any challenge to his voter status.

He argued that Ali had been a registered voter even before the last Special Intensive Revision conducted in 2002. Although an appeal against the deletion was filed on March 27, 2026 under the Representation of the People Act, 1950, no hearing had been granted in the matter.

Taking note of the larger backlog in SIR-related appeals, the Chief Justice referred to a communication received from the Chief Justice of the Calcutta High Court indicating that a substantial number of cases remained pending before appellate tribunals and that more time was needed to dispose of them.

According to Live Law, the CJI said, “In your case, we are passing an order directing them [the appellate tribunal] to provide you out-of-turn hearing and decide your matter.”

The court also directed that the appeal be decided within a stipulated time frame.

“Since the appeal is not decided so far, we request the appellate tribunal to decide this expeditiously and preferably within two months,” the court said, according to Bar and Bench.

The tribunals hearing SIR-related cases comprise former chief justices and retired judges of high courts. Since April 2026, more than 34 lakh appeals have reportedly been filed before these bodies.

Data cited before the court, according to Bar and Bench, showed that of the 58 lakh names deleted during the enumeration stage, nearly 9.64 lakh applications for inclusion had been filed by January 2026. However, only 1.82 lakh names found place in the final electoral rolls published on February 28, 2026.

Ali’s case had remained unresolved despite the passage of nearly three months since the filing of his appeal and submission of all relevant documents, Live Law noted.

The Supreme Court’s observations and directions in the case are likely to intensify scrutiny of the Special Intensive Revision process and the large number of voters whose appeals remain pending long after the electoral exercise has concluded.