SC Rejects Bengal's Plea to Stop ECI Training of Judicial Officers

The issue was mentioned by Senior Advocate Kapil Sibal before a Bench comprising Chief Justice of India Surya Kant and Justice Joymalya Bagchi.

Sibal contended that despite the Court's earlier order, the Commission had issued a training module to judicial officers which, according to him, amounted to directions on how certain documents were to be treated. He argued that the Commission could not instruct judicial officers in this manner and maintained that the officers were capable of independently discharging their functions.

"Something strange has happened. After this Court's orders, behind the back, they have issued a training module to judicial officers. They can't give directions," Sibal submitted.

The Court, however, was of the view that the judicial officers were expected to take independent decisions and were not functioning under anyone's influence. The Bench made it clear that the officers would decide the acceptability of documents in the Court's orders.

"Those officers will take a call. It is for them to decide. Even if the Commission says documents can't be accepted, judicial officers will decide," the CJI said.

The Court also cautioned against raising issues that could delay the ongoing exercise, observing that there must be a genuine necessity before the Court intervenes at the mentioning stage.

"These little excuses, and you want to stall everything. We can't hear like this. There has to be a need for it; you're going beyond our imagination. They (judges) are not to be influenced by anything.

Justice Bagchi observed that some authority had to conduct the training and noted that the Court had told all stakeholders what was required between all stakeholders. He added that if any ECI notification included conditions contrary to the Court's orders, the same could be examined appropriately.

"Who else will give the training? (If not ECI) If the ECI notification includes such a certificate, it can be looked into," Justice Bagchi said.

The Court further reiterated that the Court had granted adequate opportunity to all sides and had directed both the State government and the Commission to create a congenial environment for the judicial officers so that they work in tandem.

"Ample opportunity we have given to them. Both the State of WB and the Commission have been told by us to make a congenial environment for those judicial officers. Our orders are as clear as the daylight," Justice Bagchi added.

On the submission that a supplementary list (of valid voters), which has allegedly been prepared by the Commission, may be uploaded, the Court responded that the Commission will do it.

Earlier, on February 21, the apex court had ordered the deputation of district judges to resolve pending voter claims of people categorised in the Commission's "logical discrepancy" list. These directions had come from the Court in an extraordinary move to remove impediments in the Election Commission's Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls in West Bengal.

Subsequently, after receiving a communication from the Chief Justice of Calcutta High Court, which flagged the lack of abundant manpower, despite having assigned around 250Judicial officers' role in the SIR exercise, the apex court had permitted the Calcutta HC Chief Justice to additionally deploy civil judges from West Bengal and even judicial officers from the States of Orissa and Jharkhand.

- ANI