Read Time: 06 minutes

Synopsis

Supreme Court today said that it would hear the challenge to Calcutta High Court's order directing Central Forensic Laboratory to audit CCTV cameras used during Contai (West Bengal) Municipality election to ascertain whether there were instances of violence and vote rigging on July 11.

In May last year, a bench of Justices Chandrachud and Surya Kant had stayed the said order of Calcutta High Court and the proceeding in the PIL filed by BJP leader Somendu Adhikari in which he sought the court directions to set aside the election results. The bench remarked that the court entertaining a PIL of this nature will set a dangerous precedent as any party that is not in power can file a PIL for cancellation of election.

When the case was taken up today, the bench comprising CJI Chandrachud and Justice Pardiwala was told that the matter had become infructuous. 

Senior Advocate PS Patwalia, appearing for Adhikari, refuted the same saying, "Not at all". 

Court then said that there was no urgency in the matter and posted the same for hearing in July.

The West Bengal State Election Commission had filed a special leave petition challenging the order of Calcutta High Court from April 2022 whereby the court directed forensic audit of CCTV cameras used in Contai municipality polls. The Central Forensic Science Laboratory (CFSL), Delhi was directed to conduct the forensic audit and will submit a report to the court in a sealed cover within six weeks.

High Court had passed the order in a PIL filed by BJP leader Soumendu Adhikari alleging large-scale violence and electoral malpractices at the Contai municipal polls. Elections to the Contai Municipality happened on February 27, 2022 along with 108 civic bodies of the State. The Trinamool Congress won 102 civic bodies.

When the matter heard last year, the court had questioned Rakesh Dwivedi, Sr. Adv, appearing for the SEC as to why the order has been challenged despite the counsel before the high court consenting to the audit. Dwivedi responded by saying that the it was the counsel’s error and that such an audit could not have been ordered unless there is a prima facie finding that the footage has been tampered. The court then remarked “It appears that there have been serious irregularities.”

Sr. Adv. Patwalia, appearing for Adhikari, had argued that elections were held in three phases and that they were conducted on the directions of the court. He submitted that there have been serious allegations of booth capturing, serious violence at the hands of the ruling government. Patwalia added that Adhikari had approached the High Court in December asking for deployment of central paramilitary forces for elections, however they were dismissed as premature. It was apprised to the court that the SEC in its affidavit had stated that the elections were “more or less fair” not completely fair.

Case Title: West Bengal State Election Commission vs. Soumendhu Adhikari