New Delhi: The Supreme Court today, June 19, said that a 75-year-old advocate from Murshidabad in Bengal who had been deleted from the electoral rolls in the Special Intensive Revision appeared to be a “genuine bona fide citizen of West Bengal,” casting a cloud on the process under which 90 lakh names had been deleted, 27 lakh of whom were people who are awaiting adjudication even as the polls have ended.The Supreme Court has granted an out-of-turn hearing to the petitioner’s appeal against the deletion, reported LiveLaw. This hearing comes over a month after the completion of the assembly polls and the formation of the new government, processes in which such voters could not participate.Advocate Shakil Shaikh, appearing on behalf of the petitioner identified as Mohammad Yean Ali, informed the court that his client had been exercising voting rights in the country for more than five decades, with no previous inquiries into his voter status until now. He argued that Ali had been a valid voter even prior to 2002 – when the last SIR was held. His appeal against the deletion had been filed on March 27, 2026 under the Representation of the People Act, 1950. Regardless, he had not been granted a single hearing since.In the meantime, the state assembly elections have taken place, granting victory to the Bharatiya Janata Party. The deletions in areas where there is a significant minority population, especially in Murshidabad, played an important role in the outcome, The Wire’s analyses have shown. Murshidabad saw the highest exclusions among districts in Bengal.Click on the two dashboards here and here, to check the data for yourself.A bench comprising Chief Justice of India Surya Kant and Justice V. Mohana recorded that the petitioner has been a practicing advocate 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 LiveLaw report. The court, however, did not immediately restore Ali’s name to the voter roll.Noting the larger appellate structure constituted to handle SIR-related exclusions, Kant acknowledged that he had received a communication from the Chief Justice of the Calcutta high court stating that a huge number of appeals remained pending before the tribunals and that additional time was required. According to LiveLaw, 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 further directed the tribunal to adjudicate on the matter within a fixed time period. “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 appellate tribunals contain former high court chief justices and retired high court judges. More than 34 lakh appeals have been filed before these tribunals since April 2026.Bar and Bench reported that data presented before the court showed that out of the 58 lakh names which had been excluded during the enumeration phase of the exercise, by January 2026, around 9.64 lakh applications for inclusion had been lodged. Yet, only 1.82 lakh additions were reflected in the final electoral rolls published on February 28, 2026.Ali’s appeal had not yielded anything substantial under the standard appellate process up till today, even after three months of filing the appeal and submitting the requisite documents, noted LiveLaw.