BREAKING| Supreme Court Slams West Bengal Officials Over Attack On Judges During SIR Duty, Directs Use Of Central Forces

The Supreme Court on Thursday took serious notice of a protest in West Bengal during which judicial officers engaged in Special Intensive Revision (SIR) work were held hostage by demonstrators from yesterday afternoon till midnight, and the attack on their vehicles using stones and sticks while they were being evacuated after midnight.

The Court referred to the letter received from the Calcutta High Court Chief Justice regarding the incident that occurred in a village in Malda district, where judicial officers carrying out official duties were surrounded and prevented from leaving the area during a protest.

A bench comprising Chief Justice of India Surya Kant, Justice Joymalya Bagchi and Justice Vipul Pancholi took up the West Bengal SIR matter this morning, though it was not otherwise listed today. The lawyers appearing for the petitioners and the State in the matter, Senior Advocates Kapil Sibal, Shyam Divan, Gopal Sankaranarayanan, Menaka Guruswamy, as well as Solicitor General of India Tushar Mehta and Senior Advocate Dama Seshadri Naidu (representing the Election Commission of India) were present in the urgent hearing convened by the Court.

CJI Surya Kant revealed that he had to pass urgent orders late at night to ensure the safety of the judicial officers.

"Till 11 o'clock your Collector was not there. I had to verbally instruct very harsh orders in night. 5-year-old child not allowed food and water!" CJI said. Sibal said that he had read the report in 'The Telegraph' about the incident.

Guruswamy said that it was an "apolitical protest". The Chief Justice replied, "If the protest was apolitical, then what were the political leaders doing? Was it not their duty to get at the spot and see what's happening? That somebody's trying to take law and order in their hands? 5 o clock these people gheraoed the officers. Till 11, your Collector was not there."

Sankaranarayanan submitted that the ECI be asked to deploy central forces.

Naidu submitted that such "mobocracy" was not accepted. The Solicitor General also expressed strong views, saying that it was an "unacceptable" assault on the Supreme Court itself, as the judicial officers were performing the duty entrusted to them by the Apex Court.

Bench narrates the events in the order

CJI said that WhatsApp messages were received late at night that seven judicial officers, including three women, were gheraoed at Malda District. The gherao started at 3.30 PM, and the Registrar General of the High Court requested the State administration for action. However, nothing was done till 8.30 PM, the bench noted in the order, and later the Home Secretary was contacted. The bench observed in the order that "no tangible action was taken by the authorities" and "food and water were not supplied to the judicial officers".

The Chief Justice of the High Court had then to call the Home Secretary and other officials to monitor the situation. Finally, the judicial officers were released after 12 PM night, following the intervention of the Chief Justice of the High Court. Shockingly, while they were going back, their vehicles were subjected to stone-pelting and attack by bamboo sticks.

'Criminal failure of administration' : Bench slams Bengal officials

"We are extremely disappointed to note that the Chief Secretary could not be contacted and no messages could be shared with him," the Court noted in the order.

The Court noted that the incident was a "brazen attempt" to affect the morale of the judicial officers and to challenge the authority of the Supreme Court. The Court said that it appeared to be a "calculated and deliberated move to demoralise the judicial officers and obstruct the ongoing process of adjudication of claims in the electoral process."

"We will not allow anyone to take the law into their hands to create psychological fear in the mind of judicial officers who are performing a solemn duty," the bench said, warning that it amounts to criminal contempt. The bench also slammed the "criminal failure" of the State administration.

The manner in which the Chief Secretary, the Director General of Police, the Superintendent of Police, and the District Collector reacted was "highly deplorable", the Court observed, recording its "extreme disappointment." The Court said that these officials owed an explanation for not ensuring the safe evacuation of the judicial officers.

Guruswamy submitted that these officials were brought in by the Election Commission of India after replacing the earlier officials. "These are your officials Mr Naidu," she submitted. Sankaranarayanan added, "If the Chief Justice could not contact the Chief Secretary, it is a serious matter. Let their personal affidavits be filed."

Senior Advocate Kalyan Bandhopadhyay, for the petitioners, submitted that it was a failure of the ECI, as these officers were appointed by the ECI itself and were acting under the ECI's instructions

The Chief Secretary, DGP, District Magistrate and the SSP were issued a notice to show-cause why action should not be taken against them. They are directed to remain personally present online on April 6, at 4 PM.

Directions issued by the Court

To ensure that no impediment is caused in the SIR process entrusted to judicial officers, and with a view to assure all judicial officers that their life, liberty, property and family members will be duly protected, the Court issued the following directions.

The ECI has to requisition adequate Central Forces and deploy them at all places where judicial officers are adjudicating the objections.

The ECI and the State Govt are directed to take all remedial measures for the safe functioning of the task entrusted to the judicial officers

If any judicial officer has apprehension of security of his family, such threat perception is to be immediately assessed, and adequate measures are to be taken

The ECI and the State were directed to take all remedial measures to ensure safe and smooth functioning. Police officers must ensure that not more than 3-5 persons will enter premises (where adjudication work is going on) at one point of time for filing objections or at the time of hearing.

The ECI was directed to entrust the investigaiton of the incidents to an independent agency, CBI or the NIA.

After the order was dictated, Sibal requested that the Court omit the observation that there was "complete breakdown of law and order in the State" from the order, saying that it can be misinterpreted. Naidu opposed, saying "it was the naked truth."

Sibal submitted that it was an isolated incident in one place and should not be a reflection on the entire state.

"We have taken note of this submission and we will take care of it," Justice Bagchi said.

After the hearing was over, WB Advocate General Kishore Datta submitted that the ECI should not be acting like an adversary. In response, the CJI said :

"Mr Adv General, now you are compelling us. Unfortunately, in your state, each one of you speak political language. That is the most unfortunate thing. We have never seen such a polarized state. That even in compliance of court orders, politics is reflected. It's only because all the parties were happy, we thought we were creating a neutral kind of structure (by calling for assistance of judicial officers)...so that none of you have (issues)...and this is what is [happening]...Do you think we are not aware who are the miscreants? Atleast I was monitoring everything till 2 AM! Very unfortunate."