In a strongly worded order, the Supreme Court on Thursday termed the gherao of judicial officers in West Bengal’s Malda district a brazen attempt to browbeat the judiciary and derail the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls, warning that such actions could amount to criminal contempt of court.
The court passed a series of directions, including the deployment of central forces for the protection of judicial officers and an investigation by either the CBI or the NIA into the incident.
Calculated attempt to demoralise Judicial officers
During the urgent hearing taken after taking cognisance of a newspaper report, the Chief Justice of India said the incident was not routine but appeared to be a calculated and motivated move to demoralise judicial officers and stop the ongoing process of adjudication of objections in left-out cases.
“This incident is a brazen attempt not only to browbeat judicial officers but also to challenge the authority of this court,” the CJI said.
He added that the court would not allow anyone to interfere with judicial work or create a psychological attack on judicial officers, observing that the incident prima facie constituted criminal contempt.
The court also said the incident reflected an abdication of duty by the West Bengal government and asked senior officials to explain why no action was taken despite being informed about the situation for hours.
Central forces, security at residences ordered
The Supreme Court directed the Election Commission of India (ECI) to deploy central forces to ensure the safe working of judicial officers engaged in the SIR process.
The court also ordered that central forces be deployed at the residences of such judicial officers.
It further directed that if any judicial officer had any apprehension regarding threats to family members, the threat perception must be immediately assessed and necessary security measures taken without delay.
The court said both the ECI and the West Bengal government must take all remedial measures to ensure the safe functioning of judicial officers carrying out the court-assigned task.
Strict crowd control during hearings
Taking note of the volatile situation during the adjudication of voter list objections, the court issued strict directions on crowd control.
The Home Secretary, Director General of Police, District Magistrates and police officials were directed to ensure that not more than two or three persons are allowed to enter to file objections or be present during hearings, and not more than five persons are allowed to assemble at any given time near the hearing venues.
The court said adequate security arrangements must be put in place to ensure that judicial officers can function without fear or intimidation.
Top officers asked to file compliance report, appear before court
The court directed the Chief Secretary, DGP and the State Chief Electoral Officer to submit a compliance report detailing steps taken to ensure security and implementation of the court’s directions.
In a stern move, the court also issued show cause notices to the Chief Secretary, DGP, District Magistrate and Superintendent of Police, asking them to explain why action should not be taken against them in light of the letter received from the Calcutta High Court Chief Justice detailing the incident.
All these officers have been directed to remain present virtually before the Supreme Court on April 6 at 4 pm.
During the hearing, senior advocate Gopal Sankarnarayanan submitted that the incident was unacceptable and the officers concerned must file personal affidavits explaining the lapse.
CBI/NIA probe ordered
In a significant direction, the Supreme Court also ordered that the Election Commission entrust the inquiry or investigation into the incident to either the CBI or the National Investigation Agency.
The court said the agency would be required to submit a preliminary enquiry report directly to the Supreme Court.
Senior advocate D.S. Naidu, appearing for the Election Commission of India, told the court that the officers were effectively held hostage and that the incident was an attempt to derail the entire SIR process.
Court slams political climate
During the hearing, the Advocate General of West Bengal, Kishore Datta, submitted that the Election Commission should not act as an adversary in the matter.
The CJI responded sharply, saying, “Unfortunately, in your state, each one speaks political language, and this is the most polarised state. You are forcing us to make observations.”
The CJI added that he had personally monitored developments late into the night and said the situation was very, very unfortunate.
The Supreme Court made it clear that the SIR process must continue and that any attempt to obstruct judicial officers or interfere with the court-monitored exercise would be dealt with strictly in accordance with the law.