Justice Nariman is entitled to his opinion - however wrong it might be. But a former Judge of the Supreme Court must surely distinguish between an inference and a judicial finding. 90 lakh names being removed from an electoral roll does not mean that 90 lakh lawful voters were “disenfranchised”. Electoral rolls contain the dead, duplicates, migrants and persons otherwise ineligible for inclusion. That is precisely why revision exists. Nor does the fact that 93% of roughly 1.2 lakh decided appeals succeeded establish that 90 lakh deletions were “completely illegal”. That is an extraordinary and rather irresponsible extrapolation from a fraction of the cases. But the most remarkable leap he makes is the allegation of motive: that citizens were knocked out “in order that a government obtains what it wants”. Where is the evidence for this finding of an electoral conspiracy? I ask again - Justice Nariman - where is the evidence for your conclusion that there was an electoral conspiracy or wrongdoing? Or is this is a case where you are projecting your own visceral hatred for the government of the day by using (misusing) your credentials as a former Supreme Court justice? Or is it to lend legitimacy to your personal political preference? The Supreme Court considered the SIR, supervised aspects of the process and declined to stay it. One may disagree with the Court. However, Sir, one cannot replace evidence with indignation merely because the electoral result was politically inconvenient to you or those you call friends in another political party. And there is one rather inconvenient fact: West Bengal subsequently recorded a turnout of 93.71%. This was reported as the highest for any Assembly election in India since Independence. A democracy supposedly devastated by mass “disenfranchisement” proceeded to record the highest electoral turnout in independent India - but obviously this fact does not suit your agenda so you stay silent on it. Justice Nariman you are a disgrace to the high office you once held.