Day after, tensions flared in West Bengal’s Malda district as a group of protesters gheraoed seven judicial officers for hours, the Supreme Court on Thursday
(April 2) took serious note of the incident, citing a “trust deficit between the state government and the Election Commission of India.” The bench led by Chief Justice of India Surya Kant expressed concern over the development, remarking that he did not want to politicise the issue but questioned how such a situation was allowed to occur, ordering a probe in the incident by either CBI or NIA. The standoff, centred around alleged deletions from electoral rolls as judicial officers are working under tight deadlines to complete the adjudication process beforepolling in West Bengal on April 23 and 29. A protest began outside the Kaliachak 2 Block Development Office earlier in the day on Wednesday and was continuing late into the night. According to officials, the protesters initially sought a meeting with the judicial officers. After being denied entry, they began a demonstration around 4 pm and gheraoed the premises.
Three women judicial officers were among those stuck inside the office during the protest, officials said. "We have alerted the authorities. The district magistrate and the superintendent of police have been directed to reach the spot immediately," a senior official in the Chief Electoral Officer's (CEO) office said. A report on the incident has also been sought from the Director General of Police (DGP), he added.
WATCH | Mamata Banerjee Alleges Poll Conspiracy Ahead Of Bengal Elections, BJP Denies Voter Manipulation
Solicitor General Tushar Mehta termed the incident “shocking” and said it raised concerns over reliance on state security, while senior advocate Kapil Sibal, appearing for the West Bengal government, said political parties were not involved but acknowledged the seriousness of the matter.
CJI Slams West Bengal Govt Over Incident
Taking serious cognisance of the incident, the Supreme Court strongly condemned what it described as a direct attempt to undermine the judiciary and intimidate judicial officers. The court observed that the episode was not routine, but appeared to be a calculated and motivated move aimed at disrupting ongoing adjudication and demoralising those involved in the process.CJI said, “This incident is a brazen attempt not only to browbeat judicial officers but also to challenge the authority of this court. It was not a routine incident but appears to be a calculated, motivated move to demoralise the judicial officers and stop the ongoing process of adjudicating objections in left-out cases. We will not allow anyone to interfere and take the law into their hands in order to create a psychological attack on mind of judicial officers and constitute criminal contempt. This is also an abdication of duty by the West Bengal govt, and the officers need to furnish reasons why, even after being informed, they did not ensure safe evacuation of the officers.”
CJI Seeks Explanation From Top Officials
The Supreme Court has sought explanations from the Chief Secretary, Home Secretary, Director General of Police, and the Superintendent of Police over the delay in taking action, strongly criticising the state administration’s response. The court flagged serious concerns over the apparent inaction despite being informed, calling the situation “highly deplorable” and indicative of a breakdown in governance.CJI said, "We will not allow anyone to intervene and take the law into their hands to create psychological fear in judicial officers' minds. Yet, this amounts to criminal contempt. It also exposes the complete failure of state administration. The manner in which the Chief Secy, Home Secy, DGP, and SP is highly deplorable. [They shall] explain why, upon being informed, they failed to take any effective measure".
CJI, also referring to media reports, said it would leave it to the Election Commission to requisition paramilitary or other forces if needed, stressing that a strong message must go out as the incident amounted to an affront to the majesty of the court.
(With Inputs from PTI)
