New Delhi: The Supreme Court of India strongly criticised the administration of West Bengal over the gherao of judicial officers in Malda, describing the incident as a preplanned and calculated attempt to disrupt the electoral process.
During the hearing, Chief Justice of India Surya Kant observed that the incident appeared to be a deliberate effort to intimidate judicial officers engaged in election related duties. The court noted that the situation was serious and amounted to a direct challenge to the authority of the judiciary.
According to the court’s observations, the gherao reportedly began around 3.30 pm. Soon after the situation escalated, the Registrar General informed the administrative authorities and sought immediate intervention to ensure the safety of the officials involved. However, the court pointed out that no prompt action was taken for several hours.
The bench expressed concern that senior district officials failed to reach the spot despite being informed about the developing situation. The court noted that neither the district magistrate nor the superintendent of police arrived at the location during the critical period.
The Chief Justice also stated that the Chief Justice of the High Court had to personally contact the Director General of Police and the Home Secretary to ensure action was taken. The delay in administrative response was viewed by the court as a major lapse in handling the situation.
The Supreme Court further criticised the conduct of senior officials, including the Chief Secretary, the Director General of Police and the Home Secretary, describing their response as deeply disappointing.
During the proceedings, the court also raised concerns about the politicisation of the issue while addressing the state’s Advocate General. The bench remarked that political considerations often overshadow administrative responsibility in the state.
The Chief Justice emphasised that the court had closely monitored the developments and was aware of those involved in the incident, underlining that such actions could not be allowed to undermine the functioning of the judiciary or the electoral process.
