SC flags ‘trust deficit’, deploys judges to oversee Bengal SIR

Expressing concern over a deepening “trust deficit” between the West Bengal government and the Election Commission of India (ECI), the Supreme Court on Friday issued what it termed an “extraordinary” direction to involve serving and former district judges in the state’s contentious special intensive revision (SIR) of electoral rolls.

A bench comprising Chief Justice of India Surya Kant and Justices Joymalya Bagchi and Vipul M. Pancholi lamented the “unfortunate blame game” between the ECI and West Bengal's “democratically elected” Trinamool Congress government, saying the situation had necessitated judicial intervention to safeguard the integrity of the process.

To ensure fairness in handling claims and objections, the court ordered the deputation of judicial officers to adjudicate cases of voters placed under the “logical discrepancy” category and facing potential deletion from electoral rolls.

These discrepancies relate to inconsistencies in linking voters with the 2002 electoral roll, including mismatches in parental names and cases where the age gap between a voter and a parent is less than 15 years or more than 50 years.

Taking note of its dissatisfaction with the state government for allegedly not sparing enough Grade ‘A’ officers for the revision exercise, the bench requested Calcutta High Court chief justice Sujoy Paul, to depute serving judicial officers and identify former judges to assist with the SIR process.

Chief justice Paul has been asked to convene a meeting on Saturday with the chief secretary, the director-general of police (DGP), ECI representatives, the advocate-general of the state, the additional solicitor-general of the Union, and the registrar-general of the high court to finalise the modalities for deploying judicial officers.

“In order to ensure fairness in the adjudication of the genuineness of the documents and consequential inclusion/exclusion in voters list, and as agreed to by both sides, we are left with hardly any other option but to request the Chief Justice of the Calcutta High Court to spare serving judicial officers along with some former judicial officers in the rank of Additional District Judge and District Judges who can then be requested to revisit/dispose of the pending claims under the category of 'logical discrepancy',” the bench ordered.

Overruling strong objections from the state government, the top court permitted the ECI to publish the final voter list by 28 February — the previously fixed deadline — while allowing the possibility of supplementary lists thereafter.

The bench observed that no prejudice would be caused if supplementary lists were issued beyond 28 February, as electors’ names can be added until the last date for filing nomination papers.

Senior advocate Shyam Divan, appearing for West Bengal chief minister Mamata Banerjee, argued that decisions taken by electoral roll officers (EROs) were being re-examined by what he described as a “new species of officers” — special roll officers (SROs).

“The 'special roll officers' cannot trump EROs. How can they on a wholesale basis reject what ERO has done?” Divan asked.

The ECI rejected this contention, asserting that SROs have existed since the inception of the process. The bench accepted the poll panel’s submission on this point.

The court also made it clear that any continued non-cooperation would invite stronger measures, including the deployment of judicial officers or officials from other states at the ECI’s request.

During the hearing, senior advocate Kapil Sibal, representing the state government, cautioned that allowing publication of the final roll by 28 February could trigger law and order issues.

Seeking to strike a balance, the bench said judicial and former judicial officers adjudicating claims would be assisted by the EC’s micro-observers as well as state government officials.

“The circumstances being extraordinary, the entrustment of work to judicial officers and former judicial officers is also extraordinary,” the bench noted.

Senior advocate D.S. Naidu, appearing for the ECI, alleged non-cooperation and lapses in law enforcement, claiming that miscreants had torn up official notices but that little action had followed. He also produced statements made by political functionaries against poll officials and said no FIRs had been registered.

CJI Kant, after perusing the statements, remarked: “Unfortunately, during the election such irresponsible statements are being made. If no action is taken, the DGP will face the consequences.”

The bench directed district collectors and superintendents of police (SPs) to extend logistical and security support to judicial officers deputed for the SIR work, clarifying that their orders would be treated as orders of the court.

Collectors and SPs, the bench added, would be deemed to be on deputation for ensuring compliance with directions issued from time to time. The court further directed the DGP to file an affidavit detailing steps taken on complaints regarding threats to officers involved in the SIR process.

It also asked the chief justice of the Calcutta High Court to devise an interim arrangement for transferring urgent matters to other courts for a period of 10 days.

Earlier, on 9 February, the apex court had warned that it would not permit any impediment in completion of the SIR exercise and had directed the West Bengal DGP to file an affidavit on allegations that EC notices were burnt by miscreants.

With PTI inputs