Contempt: Calcutta HC Refuses To Issue Ex Parte ‘Rule’ Against SEC Over Delay In Deploying Central Forces During Panchayat Polls

The Calcutta High Court on Friday refrained from issuing ex parte rule against the West Bengal government and State Election Commission in contempt proceedings arising out of alleged violation of Court’s orders pertaining to the deployment of central forces, et. al in the recently concluded Panchayat Elections.

Senior Advocate Guru Krishna Kumar appearing for the contempt applicants submitted that if at the stage of conclusion of arguments of the applicants, the Court was prima facie satisfied that contempt had indeed occurred, then they were entitled to issue ‘Rule’ ex parte, under Rule 19 of the Calcutta High Court Contempt of Court Rules.

Under rule 19, the Court may issue Rule Nisi or summarily reject the petition or make such older thereupon as thought fit.

In refuting such a prayer, a division-bench of Chief Justice TS Sivagnanam and Justice Uday Kumar held:

“Senior Advocate for the applicants submits that at this juncture, the respondents are not required to be heard in the matter as it is the prima facie satisfaction of this court whether rule has to be issued. Nevertheless we have been hearing the contempt applications since 24^th August 2023, and proposed as to how the matter would be heard. Therefore, the Court proposes to hear the respondents on the limited issue of the imposition of rule or otherwise.”

Applicants had submitted that the State and State Election Commission had committed blatant and flagrant violation of the Court’s orders which had directed the immediate deployment of central forces, and demarcation of sensitive areas for the Panchayat Election.

It was submitted that, due to the ignorance of Court orders, large-scale violence had taken place and that many people had lost their lives and been injured in such violence.

Applicants argued that the respondents had failed to comply with the time-bound court order in letter-and-spirit on the pretext that they had preferred an SLP before the Apex Court, and that the pendency of such SLP, which was later dismissed, could not be grounds for non-compliance of orders which directed forthwith deployment of central forces.

It was further submitted that the respondents paid no heed to the gravity of the situation, by not only being unable to decide upon the sufficient number of central forces to deploy, but also in being unable to provide the Inspector-General of the BSF who was the leader of the forces, with a proper deployment plan.

At the admission stage, the respondents had argued that they had genuinely complied with the Court’s orders, and that once the Supreme Court had disposed of the SLP, central forces were immediately deployed within the following days.

Accordingly, upon conclusion of the arguments of the applicants, the Court posted the matter on 11^th October to hear the respondents on the point of why ‘Rule’ shall not be issued against them under the Court’s contempt jurisdiction.

Case: Suvendu Adhikari v Rajiva Sinha State Election Commissioner & connected applications

Case No: CPAN/831/2023