Supreme Court Allows SIR Appellate Tribunal Judge To Approach Calcutta HC For Enhanced Security

The Supreme Court today requested the Chief Justice of the Calcutta High Court to examine the plea for enhanced security filed by the son of former Calcutta High Court judge Justice Anindita Roy Saraswati, who is serving as the Appellate Tribunal for the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) exercise in West Bengal.

A bench of CJI Surya Kant, Justice Joymalya Bagchi and Justice V. Mohana disposed of the petition with liberty to the petitioner to approach the Chief Justice of the Calcutta High Court.

“The matter pertains to adequate security to a former judge of the High Court who is presently performing the duties of Appellate Tribunal, Special Intensive Revision in the State of West Bengal. In our considered opinion, the petitioner may approach the Hon'ble Chief Justice of the Calcutta High Court, whom we request to look into the matter and take necessary steps as may be required,” the Court ordered.

The petition was filed by Advocate Ananya Kanti Roy Saraswati, son of Justice Anindita Roy Saraswati, seeking directions for adequate security and an independent investigation into alleged threats received by the family. The petitioner contended that the judge and her family had received threats in connection with her official duties. It was contended that the threats were intended to influence the discharge of judicial and quasi-judicial functions connected with the SIR Tribunal.

The petition stated that Justice Saraswati met with a road accident on April 22, 2026, while travelling to the tribunal, and the police opined that it was a planned incident. The petition alleged that days later, on April 30, a handwritten threat letter was delivered through Speed Post to her Rajarhat residence, following which a case was registered under Sections 224, 351(2), 351(4) and 61(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. The petition further alleged that a substantially identical threat letter was subsequently delivered to the petitioner's Kolkata residence and the CCTV wiring was tampered with.

The petition claimed that the threatening communications warned that Justice Saraswati and her family would be killed if Muslim persons' names were not included in the voter list while she discharged her duties as the Appellate Tribunal in the SIR exercise. The petition contended that the threats formed part of a coordinated attempt to intimidate the family and interfere with judicial functioning.

Alleging that repeated representations to the Bidhannagar Police Commissionerate had not resulted in adequate protection, the petitioner sought a comprehensive threat assessment, armed police protection, and transfer of the investigation to an independent agency or the constitution of a court-monitored Special Investigation Team.

The Supreme Court, however, did not examine the merits of the petition and requested the High Court Chief Justice to consider the issue of security and take necessary steps.

Background

The petition arises out of the Supreme Court-monitored Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls in West Bengal, undertaken ahead of the 2026 Assembly elections. During the SIR process, the Supreme Court had directed that claims and objections relating to inclusion and deletion of voters be adjudicated by judicial officers after noting a "trust deficit" between the Election Commission of India and the State authorities.

Subsequently, to provide an independent appellate remedy against those decisions, the Court directed the constitution of Appellate Tribunals comprising former High Court Chief Justices and retired High Court judges. Justice Anindita Roy Saraswati was appointed as one of the members of these Appellate Tribunals.

The Appellate Tribunals have since been hearing appeals against inclusion and exclusion of names from the electoral rolls. In April this year, the Supreme Court declined to permit persons whose names had been deleted to vote merely because their appeals were pending before the tribunals, while clarifying that the tribunals would continue to adjudicate the appeals in accordance with the procedure evolved by them.

The petition was filed through Advocate-on-Record Ashish Pandey.

Case no. – W.P.(Crl.) No. 296/2026

Case Title: Ananya Kanti Roy Saraswati v. Union of India & Ors.