The Supreme Court on Tuesday sought responses from the Election Commission of India as well as the State of West Bengal on a plea by Sanatani Sangsad, which has urged that State police personnel be placed under the control of the ECI until the completion of the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of the electoral rolls in West Bengal. In the alternative, the petition seeks deployment of central armed forces to ensure a smooth revision process.

Senior Advocate V. Giri, appearing for the petitioner before a bench led by Chief Justice of India Surya Kant and Justice Joymalya Bagchi, alleged rising incidents of violence affecting Booth Level Officers during SIR duties, necessitating urgent intervention and interim protection. “BLOs must be safeguarded,” he pressed.

However, Justice Bagchi noted that the petition references only a single FIR and relies largely on past incidents. “Except for one FIR, there is nothing concrete—these are historical instances and presumptive materials,” the judge remarked.

Representing the ECI, Senior Advocate Rakesh Dwivedi submitted that policing ordinarily remains a State function. If the State fails to cooperate or protect BLOs, he stated, the Commission may be left with no choice but to seek police deputation or request central forces. He indicated that a stern communication has already been issued to the State citing recent obstructions and gherao incidents involving electoral officials.

Justice Bagchi, however, pointed out submissions in related matters suggesting that gherao incidents may also be due to BLO fatigue. Dwivedi countered that political interference, not workload, was the real source of pressure—referring to reports from Kerala where a BLO allegedly died by suicide amid political push. The bench stressed it would not engage in a political blame game.

“You tell us the specific impediment to BLOs’ functioning,” the CJI asked. Dwivedi said protection assurance must come from the State, else the ECI will be compelled to intervene more strongly.

Justice Bagchi reminded that police come under ECI control only after the election process formally begins, adding that grievances about State inaction can be brought to the Court for orders. He further questioned whether West Bengal faces a uniquely disruptive environment warranting extraordinary directions: “One FIR—can this alone justify placing State police under ECI? Can we assume no obstruction exists in other States?”

The bench acknowledged the seriousness of any threats to BLOs but emphasized the need for a prima facie case. CJI Kant observed that the petition was filed by a third party rather than the ECI itself: “If the Commission had come, we would have considered it. But we need more than a single isolated incident before issuing stringent orders.”

Dwivedi affirmed that ECI does possess authority to requisition central assistance but has refrained due to the sensitivity of doing so. He assured that necessary measures would be taken to ensure BLO security during SIR.

Case: Sanatani Sangsad v. Election Commission of India | W.P.(C) No. 1216/2025