Complete failure of administration in Malda: Supreme Court on gherao of judicial officers

Earlier in the day, a three-judge bench of Chief Justice of India Surya Kant, Justices Joymalya Bagchi and Vipul M Pancholi noted that a letter from the Chief Justice of the Calcutta High Court stated that the judicial officers in Malda did not receive any help, even from senior officials.

In its order dictated in open court, the bench said the incident also “exposes the complete failure of the civil and police administration of the state”. Senior Advocate Kapil Sibal requested the bench not to say there is complete breakdown of law and order in the state as it was confined only to a certain area. “There will be repercussions,” he said, making the request.

Senior Advocate D S Naidu, appearing for the Chief Electoral Officer, West Bengal, however, said “that is the naked truth”. Solicitor General Tushar Mehta said, “I am posing a question to myself, what there can be (to constitute a breakdown of law and order)?

Justice Bagchi told Sibal: “We understand your submission, we will take care of it.” The final order uploaded on the SC website later in the day said the incident “reflects a complete failure on the part of the civil and police administration, in so far as the law and order situation in Maldah District is concerned.”

Responding to submission that the protests were “apolitical” and that the onus was on the EC as all officials had been replaced by the poll body, CJI Surya Kant said, “If the protest was apolitical, then what were the political leaders doing? Was it not their duty to go to the spot and see what was happening, that somebody was trying to take the law and order into their hands?”

When Bengal Advocate General Kishore Datta submitted that the EC “should not be acting like an adversary”, the CJI said: “Mr Advocate General, now you are compelling us. Unfortunately, in your state, each one of you speaks political language. That is the most unfortunate thing. We have never seen such a polarised state. That even in compliance with court orders, politics is reflected… Do you think we are not aware of who the miscreants are? At least, I was monitoring everything till 2 am. Very unfortunate.”

The bench said: “The incident…is a brazen attempt not only to browbeat judicial officers, but also amounts to a challenge to the authority of this court.”

The court said it “certainly cannot be construed to be a routine occurrence and, ex facie, appears to be a calculated, well-planned and deliberate act intended to demoralise judicial officers and obstruct the ongoing process of adjudication of objections in the remaining cases. We have no hesitation in observing that we will not permit any person to take the law into their own hands so as to create a climate of psychological fear in the minds of judicial officers who are discharging their duties.”

The court said, “Such conduct, undoubtedly, amounts to criminal contempt within the meaning of Section 2(c) of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971.”

The bench said: “It pains us to observe that the manner in which the Chief Secretary, the Home Secretary, the Director General of Police, the Collector and the Superintendent of Police have acted is highly deplorable. They owe an explanation to this court as to why, upon being informed that the judicial officers had been gheraoed, no effective measures were taken to secure their safe evacuation. It was incumbent upon the state administration to immediately inform the Election Commission of India and seek deployment of central forces, wherever necessary, to ensure the safety of the judicial officers.”

The bench asked the the Chief Secretary, the DGP, the District Magistrate, Malda and the Superintendent of Police, Malda to show cause as to why suitable action should not be taken against them in light of the Calcutta High Court Chief Justice’s letter, and asked them to appear before the court virtually when it hears the matter next on April 6.

The bench said, “We are also extremely disappointed to note, from the…letter of the…Chief Justice, that the Chief Secretary of the State could not be contacted, as he had not shared a mobile number with WhatsApp facility, as a result of which no communication could be conveyed to him.”

Taking up the matter as soon as the court assembled in the morning, CJI Kant expressed the bench’s concern over the violence and said he was monitoring the situation till about 2 am.

“At 5 o’clock, these people gheraoed the officers, and till 11 pm, even the collector was not there. I had to verbally issue very harsh orders in the night, and only then did the administration come into motion. Their children are in the room… and they are not even allowed to share food and water,” the CJI said.

Senior Advocate Kapil Sibal said he had read news reports. Sharing the bench’s concern, he said, “Obviously, there is something happening there which is of some concern.”

Solicitor General Tushar Mehta said the judicial officers were entrusted with the responsibility by the SC itself and what happened was therefore an affront to the majesty of the top court.

Senior Advocate Menaka Guruswamy, appearing for the state, sought to put the onus on EC, saying “officials were transferred” and “EC is now tasked with this”. “The district collectors were transferred, and the local IPS officers have all been transferred.”

To this the CJI said: “They (officials) have not been imported from another country.”

Senior Advocate Naidu pointed out that a PIL had recently been filed in the High Court challenging the transfers, but it was dismissed. He said the HC Chief Justice “is aware that earlier a judicial officer was threatened, now it has come to physical assault as well”.

Justice Bagchi said, “We are fully conscious of the powers and the exercise of the powers by EC, and we are not at all commenting on that. What we are commenting on is that the people who are entrusted now with the maintenance of law and order need to be more vigilant.”

Naidu said, “Nobody could help if it’s mobocracy.” He added that the attempt was to drive fear into the judicial officers. “They wanted to derail the process and terrorise the judicial officers who are impartial.”

Responding to Naidu’s charges, Guruswamy said, “These are your officials not taking the CJ’s call.”

Naidu countered: “Nobody would expect that judicial officers would be taken for ransom, held hostage and such is the jungle raj.”

Justice Bagchi said, “Please make enquiries of the efforts which were required to be made by the office of the Chief Justice of the Calcutta High Court to contact the topmost civil servant presently in charge of the affairs of the state of West Bengal.”

Senior Advocate Gopal Sankaranarayanan, also appearing for the state, said, “The responsibility is clearly of us, the state, I don’t think we are running away from that.”

Justice Bagchi said, “It makes no good hearing here to say that we are dissociating ourselves with…There are leaders leading the state’s political executive, and there are leaders from the Opposition. All of them need to in one voice condemn.”

In its order, the court asked the EC to requisition adequate central forces and deploy them at all places where judicial officers are adjudicating the claims and objections as well as the places where they are staying.

It also asked the police to ensure that no more than three to five persons enter the premises at the time of filing or hearing of objections.

SC QUOTES –

The incident “reflects a complete failure on the part of the civil and police administration, in so far as the law and order situation in Maldah District is concerned”

“Unfortunately, in your state, each one of you speaks political language. That is the most unfortunate thing. We have never seen such a polarised state. That even in compliance with court orders, politics is reflected…”

“The incident…is a brazen attempt not only to browbeat judicial officers, but also amounts to a challenge to the authority of this court”

“It pains us to observe that the manner in which the Chief Secretary, the Home Secretary, the DGP, the Collector and the SP have acted is highly deplorable. They owe an explanation to this court as to why… no effective measures were taken to secure their safe evacuation”

“We are fully conscious of the powers and the exercise of the powers by EC, and we are not at all commenting on that. What we are commenting on is that the people who are entrusted now with the maintenance of law and order need to be more vigilant”