Breaking: Supreme Court Slams West Bengal Over Mobocracy And Attack On Judicial Officers, Says "Complete Failure Of Civil & Police Administration In State"

The Supreme Court expressed grave "disappointment" and "extreme concern" over a chilling security lapse in Malda district, where seven judicial officers were gheraoed and later attacked by a mob.

The Bench characterized the incident as a "brazen attempt" to browbeat the judiciary and a direct challenge to the authority of the apex court.

The case was mentioned today before the Supreme Court. Senior Advocate Kapil Sibal referred to a recent report from The Telegraph, to which Chief Justice Surya Kant responded by noting that the Court had been receiving reports since 2:00 AM.

Yesterday, the Court announced the constitution of 19 Appellate Tribunals to handle the mounting appeals arising from the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of voter rolls in West Bengal. Citing a status report from the Chief Justice of the Calcutta High Court, the Court noted that judicial officers have achieved an unprecedented disposal rate, clearing 47.40 lakh objections out of a total 65 lakh as of March 31.

A bench comprising Chief Justice Surya Kant, Justice Joymalya Bagchi and Justice Vipul Pancholi ordered, "We are extremely disappointed to note the penultimate paragraph of the letter sent by the Honorable Chief Justice. The Honorable Chief Justice mentioned that the Chief Secretary could not be contacted and did not share his mobile number with WhatsApp facility, due to which no message could be shared with him. Our Honorable Chief Justice also speaks volumes about the duty entrusted to the judicial officers for the adjudication of objections in the SIR process...It is clear that the judicial officers, to whom the responsibility to adjudicate objections in the SIR process has been entrusted, are performing duties for and on behalf of the Court. They are our extended hands. The incident that took place yesterday is a brazen attempt not only to prohibit the judicial officers from acting but is also now challenging the authority of the Court...It was not a routine incident; the exercise appears to be a calculated, well-planned, and deliberate move to demoralize the judicial officers and obstruct the ongoing process of adjudication of objections in the electoral cases. We will not allow anyone to interfere and take the law into their hands in order to create psychological fear in the minds of the judicial officers who are performing their solemn duty. This undoubtedly amounts to criminal contempt within the meaning of the Contempt of Courts Act."

Senior Advocates Kapil Sibal, Shyam Diwan, Gopal Sankaranarayanan and Kalyan Bandhopadhyay appearing for the Petitioners, while Solicitor General Tushar Mehta and Senior Advocate Dama Seshadri Naidu appearing for the ECI.

The Court added, "Besides, it also exposes the complete failure of the civil and police administration in the State of West Bengal. The manner in which the Chief Secretary, Home Secretary, Director General of Police, the Collector, and the Superintendent of Police have acted is highly deplorable. They owe an explanation to the Court as to why, upon being informed that the judicial officers were gheraoed at around 3:30 p.m., they failed to take any effective measures for their safe evacuation...It was imperative upon the state administration to immediately inform the Election Commission of India and seek the deployment of Central Forces to ensure the safety of the judicial officers and their family members, and with a view to ensure that no obstruction or impediment is caused in the ongoing SIR process entrusted to the judicial officers."

The Court revealed details of a formal letter received today from the Chief Justice of the Calcutta High Court. The communication detailed a harrowing ordeal that began at 3:30 PM yesterday in the Kaliachak area of Malda district. Seven judicial officers, including three women, were surrounded and gheraoed by "anti-social elements." 

"A letter dated 2nd April 2026 has been received from the Honorable Chief Justice of the High Court at Calcutta today in the morning. Before that, the message was that seven judicial officers, including three women, were gheraoed by some anti-social elements in the judicial office in the Kaliachak area of Malda district. The gherao started at around 2:30 p.m. The Registrar General of the High Court immediately informed the administrative authority of the state and requested immediate action...After that, however, the timing was changed to 3:30 p.m. instead. The Registrar General of the High Court contacted the Home Secretary, the Director General of Police, and other officers in a group call with the Chief Justice of the High Court. An assurance was given for early action, but no tangible action was taken....No Superintendent of Police reached the judicial office where the judicial officers were gheraoed. The Chief Justice had to call the Home Secretary at his residential office, requesting them to monitor the situation", the Court ordered.

Despite immediate alerts from the Registrar General to state administrative authorities, the Bench noted with dismay that no action was taken for five hours.

"It is deeply concerning that neither the District Magistrate nor the Superintendent of Police reached the spot," the CJI remarked. "The Chief Justice of the High Court was compelled to personally call the DGP and the Home Secretary to ensure their safety." The situation escalated further after midnight. Even as the officers were finally being evacuated, their vehicles were subjected to stone-pelting and physical attacks with sticks.

The CJI expressed concern over the breakdown of order, stating that officers were gheraoed at 5:00 PM and remained without assistance until 11:00 PM.

"Some senior judges of the High Court were also associated. Eventually, the Home Secretary and the Director General of Police reached the residence of the Honorable Chief Justice after 12:00 midnight. Finally, the judicial officers could be released through the intervention of the Honorable Chief Justice and other judges of the High Court after 12:00 midnight...That is what happened. Shockingly, when the judicial officers were released around midnight and were going back to their respective places of stay, stones were pelted at them. They were also attacked with bamboo sticks and bricks", the Court said.

While Sibal termed the situation unfortunate, Senior Advocate Menaka Guruswamy pointed out that most of the concerned officers have already been transferred out of the state.

The Bench took a stern view of the deteriorating security situation.

Senior Advocate D.S. Naidu remarked that while judicial officers were previously facing threats, the situation has now escalated to physical intimidation, warning that the rule of law cannot survive "mobocracy."

Justice Bagchi noted that even after the Chief Justice of the High Court contacted the top civil servant, the situation persisted. The Court emphasized that all leaders must condemn these acts in one voice, asserting that the Special Officers are protected by the Court and their orders are to be treated as orders of the Court itself.

Justice Bagchi said, "We leave it to ECI to get forces from anywhere and ensure the security of judicial officers...This completely dilutes our order. They need to complete the verification within the scheduled time." 

The Court ordered, "The Honorable Chief Justice has strongly deprecated the delay in taking action on the part of the civil and police administration. It was also pointed out that after yesterday’s hearing, all district judges were addressed through video conference to motivate all judicial officers to complete the remaining work by the night of 5th April. Particularly in the first phase, the judicial officers gave a positive response. This incident, according to the Honorable Chief Justice, is likely to have a chilling effect on the judicial officers who are working tirelessly without taking any leave, even on Saturdays and Sundays...Regarding the security of the officers, the Solicitor General Tushar Mehta (SG) argued that the State can no longer be entrusted with this responsibility. In response, Justice Bagchi directed that the Election Commission of India (ECI) may source security forces from any necessary agency, including Central Armed Police Forces (CAPF), to ensure the safety of judicial officers."

Senior Advocate Sankarnarayanan assured the Court of full cooperation in deploying CAPF, despite ongoing protests from villagers.

The Solicitor General described the current state of affairs as an "affront to the majesty of the rule of law."

Justice Bagchi added that such disruptions completely dilute the Court’s previous orders and stressed that the verification process must be completed within the scheduled timeline despite these challenges.

The Court directed, "With a view to assure all judicial officers that their lives, liberty, property, and family members will be duly protected under the orders and directions of this Court, we deem it appropriate to issue the following interim measures for immediate compliance: 1. The Election Commission of India is directed to requisition adequate central forces and deploy them at all places where judicial officers are adjudicating objections under the SIR process. 2. Adequate security shall be deployed at the places, including hotels or government guest houses, where these officers are presently staying. 3. Let a crime be registered against these miscreants so that it will serve as an example. They should be brought to book. 4. Similarly, if any judicial officer has any apprehension regarding the security of his or her family members, such perceptions will also be immediately assessed and adequate measures will be taken. 5. The Home Secretary, Director General of Police, District Magistrates, and Senior Superintendents of Police are jointly and severally directed to ensure that not more than three to five persons enter the premises at one point of time for the purpose of filing objections or at the time of hearing such objections."

It added, "In none of the premises where the adjudication work is going on shall more than five persons be allowed to assemble, for which adequate measures shall be taken during the course of the day itself. The Chief Secretary, the Director General of Police, and the Chief Electoral Officer are directed to submit a compliance report...The Chief Secretary, the Director General of Police, the District Magistrate, and the SSP are also directed to show cause as to why suitable action should not be taken against them in light of the contents of the letter received from the Honorable Chief Justice of the High Court. The Registry is directed to forward a copy of the  letter received from the Chief Justice to all of them. They are directed to remain present online on 6th April at 4:00 p.m."

Background

Previously, the Court ordered the creation of a special judicial bench to hear appeals from people whose names were rejected by the Judicial Officers after adjudication from West Bengal's voter list. The Court made it clear that only judges can decide these appeals. To make this happen, the Election Commission of India (ECI) must pay for all the costs, including the salaries of the judges and the 500 judicial officers currently working overtime to fix the lists. The order came after the Court learned that judicial officers have already cleared over 10 lakh cases, working through weekends and holidays to finish the job. The Court also warned the ECI to stop "technical disruptions" like login problems that were slowing down the work.

The Court clarified that rejections made by judicial officers during the SIR cannot be challenged before any executive or administrative body. Instead, the Chief Justice of the Calcutta High Court is authorized to appoint a specialized bench consisting of a former Chief Justice and two or three former (or sitting) High Court judges. The Election Commission of India (ECI) must officially notify this Appellate Tribunal and bear all associated costs, including honorariums for the judges and the 200 judicial officers requisitioned from Odisha and Jharkhand.

On February 24, the Court had modified its earlier order and asked the Calcutta High Court to draw officers in the rank of civil judges (civil and junior division having experience not less than 3 years) for the verification of approximately 80 lacs cases of 'logical discrepancies'. The report from the Chief Justice of the Calcutta High Court highlighted the "enormity of the exercise," noting that 250 judges currently assigned to verify 80 lakh logical discrepancies would take 80 days to finish at their current pace. To accelerate this, the bench authorized the Calcutta High Court to draft civil judges with at least three years of experience and, if necessary, requisition serving or retired officers from Odisha and Jharkhand, with the ECI bearing all travel and lodging costs.

On February 20, 2026, the Court had asked the Calcutta High Court to appoint judicial officers to oversee the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls. The Bench directed that District and Additional District Judges be deputed to adjudicate the claims and objections, effectively shifting the verification process into a quasi-judicial framework.

Previously, the Court issued a show-cause notice to the Director General of Police (DGP) in response to reports submitted by the Election Commission of India (ECI) regarding widespread threats and violence directed at officials performing Special Intensive Revision (SIR) duties. The Court has also passed directions in order to streamline the ongoing process of SIR.

On February 9, Senior Advocate Shyam Divan raised concerns about the potential consequences of this system, arguing that the large-scale purging of voter names should not be allowed to proceed under such conditions. In response, the Court said that the micro-observers as a team intended to assist the Electoral Registration Officers (EROs) and their assistants (AEROs). Senior Advocate Naidu for ECI explained that these observers serve an advisory role, providing guidance on which voter entries are acceptable. He further noted that these individuals had already completed a necessary ten-day training period. Chief Justice said that if the state-proposed Group B officers joined the process immediately, they could provide their own expert opinions, which would ultimately improve the quality and accuracy of the decisions made by the EROs.

On January 19, the Court issued directions regarding the 1.25 crores voters in West Bengal falling in the category of 'Logistical Discrepancies'. The Court has directed the Election Commission of India to hear the objections/discrepancies to these voters and to make smooth arrangements for such objections.

Previously, Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee appeared in person and submitted to the Court that the Election Commission is targeting the State on the eve of elections and that the SIR process is only for deletion and not for exclusion. She questioned the extreme urgency of the three-month timeline, noting that the pressure led to over 100 deaths, including those of Booth Level Officers, and accused the ECI of operating via informal instructions through WhatsApp.

It was also submitted that these actions lead to large-scale disenfranchisement and alleged serious irregularities in how the ECI classifies individuals under the ‘Logical Discrepancy’ category. She contended that the ECI fails to upload these lists online, which deprives citizens of transparency and the chance to respond.

The Court issued directions regarding the 1.25 crores voters in West Bengal falling in the category of 'Logistical Discrepancies'. The Court directed the Election Commission of India to hear the objections/discrepancies to these voters and to make smooth arrangements for such objections.

The Court noted that there were about 1.25 crores notices which have been issued for the purpose of the verification of documents, out of them, one category is described as 'logical discrepancy'. These notices were categorised into three headings, i.e. 1. Mapped, linked with the previous SIR of 2002; 2. Unmapped, voters who are not linked with the SIR of 2002; and 3. Logical Discrepancy, which comprises the maximum voters of 1.36 crores.

The Supreme Court had sought a response from the Election Commission on fresh interim pleas of Trinamool Congress MPs alleging arbitrariness and procedural irregularities in the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls in West Bengal.

Previously, the Supreme Court had sought a response from the Election Commission on fresh interim pleas of Trinamool Congress MPs alleging arbitrariness and procedural irregularities in the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls in West Bengal.

Derek O'Brien, in his plea, alleged arbitrariness and procedural irregularities in the SIR of electoral rolls in the state. The application said that since the inception of the SIR process in the state, the EC has issued instructions to officers at the ground level through "informal and extra-statutory channels", such as WhatsApp messages and oral directions conveyed during video conferences, instead of issuing formal written instructions. It said that on November 30 last year, the poll panel granted only a limited extension of time in relation to the revision schedule and fixed January 15, 2026, as the last date for submission of claims and objections. The application has sought a direction from the EC to extend the deadline for submitting claims and objections.

The Court had also sought separate responses of the Election Commission (EC) on pleas filed by DMK, CPI(M), West Bengal Congress and Trinamool Congress leaders challenging the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of the electoral rolls in Tamil Nadu and West Bengal, respectively.

Cause Title: Mamata Banerjee v. Election Commission of India [W.P.(C) No. 129 of 2026], Mostari Banu v. The Election Commission of India [W.P. (C) No. 1089/ 2025] and Derek O' Brien v. The Election Commission of India [W.P. (C) No. 737/ 2025]