Supreme Court of India on Monday pulled up the West Bengal Chief Secretary for failing to respond to calls from the Chief Justice of the Calcutta High Court during the Malda incident on April 1. The court termed the lapse serious and indicative of a breakdown in communication at the highest levels of the state bureaucracy.
The remarks came in the context of an incident in Malda district where seven judicial officers engaged in Special Intensive Revision (SIR) work were allegedly gheraoed and attacked for several hours. The situation, according to the court, reflected not just a law and order failure but a deeper administrative lapse.
A bench led by Chief Justice Surya Kant, along with Justices Joymalya Bagchi and Vipul M Pancholi, made pointed observations on the functioning of the West Bengal administration. The bench noted that such incidents contribute to the erosion of credibility of the state bureaucracy and warned against the growing perception of political interference in governance.
The court questioned Chief Secretary Dushyant Nariala directly, asking whether it was acceptable that calls from a High Court Chief Justice went unanswered during a critical situation involving judicial officers. It directed him to issue an apology, stating that the episode reflected a clear failure of district-level administration.
The court went a step further by describing the Malda incident as “pre-planned and motivated”. The judicial officers were part of a large-scale exercise involving around 700 officials deployed across West Bengal, Odisha, and Jharkhand to handle over 60 lakh objections related to voter list revisions.
The gherao of officers for nearly five hours raised serious concerns about their safety and the ability of the administration to ensure a secure working environment for officials performing statutory duties. The court’s remarks indicate that it views the incident not as an isolated outburst but as a coordinated disruption.
Following the submission of a report by the National Investigation Agency, the Supreme Court exercised its plenary powers to transfer all cases related to the Malda incident to the central agency. This move signals the seriousness with which the court is treating the matter.
In a significant direction, the court ordered that all 26 individuals arrested by the West Bengal Police in connection with the incident be interrogated by the NIA, even if they are currently in judicial custody. This ensures that the central agency has full access to the accused for a comprehensive investigation.
Even as judicial scrutiny intensified, administrative action has begun within the district. The Malda District Magistrate has issued a show-cause notice to Additional District Magistrate (Law and Order) Shaikh Ansar Ahmad over what has been described as a “serious lapse in duty”.
The notice, dated April 4, points to Ahmad’s failure to adequately communicate the gravity of the situation to higher authorities between 3:30 pm and 8:30 pm on April 1. According to the document, despite being in active communication with local officials such as the Sub-Divisional Officer and Block Development Officer, he did not escalate the situation in a timely manner.
The administration has highlighted that this five-hour gap in reporting left senior officials without crucial field-level inputs, severely hampering the ability to take preventive or corrective measures. Ahmad has been asked to submit a detailed written explanation outlining his actions and responsibilities during the incident.
The Malda incident has quickly escalated into a major political flashpoint in West Bengal, especially with Assembly elections approaching. Both the Bharatiya Janata Party and the Trinamool Congress have traded accusations, each blaming the other for the breakdown in law and order.
The opposition has raised concerns about the safety of officials and the integrity of electoral processes, while the ruling establishment has sought to counter these claims, leading to a sharp political confrontation. The Supreme Court’s intervention is likely to further intensify the debate, as it brings judicial scrutiny into an already volatile political environment.
The Supreme Court’s observations in the Malda incident go beyond the immediate facts of the case. They raise fundamental questions about administrative responsiveness, coordination between institutions, and the ability of the state to protect officials carrying out critical public duties.
