On Thursday, the Supreme Court strongly criticized the threats faced by judicial officers working on the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of voter lists in West Bengal. The Court ordered that central armed forces must be deployed to ensure their safety.

The incident took place in Malda district, where seven judicial officers including three women were surrounded and held for hours by protestors who were angry about their names being removed from the electoral rolls.

A bench led by Chief Justice of India Surya Kant, along with Justice Joymalya Bagchi and Justice Vipul Pancholi, urgently took up the West Bengal SIR issue. This was done even though the matter was not originally scheduled, after the court received a letter from the Chief Justice of the Calcutta High Court about the previous day’s events.

Judicial Officers Held in Malda:

The letter stated that seven judicial officers, including three women, were surrounded by villagers in Malda district while carrying out their Special Intensive Revision (SIR) responsibilities.

They were held captive from 3:30 p.m. until midnight and released only after the Chief Justice of the Calcutta High Court urged the State administration to take immediate action. The administration’s response was slow. When the officers were finally evacuated at midnight, their vehicles were attacked with stones and bamboo sticks.

Court Orders Security:

The Court expressed strong disappointment with senior State officials, including the Chief Secretary, Home Secretary, DGP, SSP, and District Collector. It then ordered the Election Commission of India to call in central security forces to protect the judicial officers.

Advocate General Objects:

After the Supreme Court delivered its order, West Bengal’s Advocate General, Kishore Datta, argued that the Election Commission of India (ECI) should not act in a hostile or adversarial manner.

CJI’s Sharp Reply:

Chief Justice of India Surya Kant responded firmly:

"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."

Petitioners’ Claim:

Earlier, Senior Advocate Menaka Guruswamy, representing the petitioners, stated that the gherao of judicial officers had taken place during what she described as an “apolitical protest.”

CJI’s Rebuttal:

The Chief Justice challenged this claim:

"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."

Justice Bagchi’s Observation :

Justice Joymalya Bagchi emphasized that the incident must be condemned universally. He stated:

"All leaders need to condemn this in one voice. We are here to protect the officers. Their orders are deemed to be orders of our court," the judge said”

CASE DETAILS : By Court’s Motion (Dairy N0: 19822/2026)