NEWS WAVE INDIA: The Calcutta High Court has given its opinion in favour of deploying central forces for ensuring security in panchayat elections. Specifically, it has identified 7 districts of the state as more vulnerable, and directed the immediate deployment of central forces in those districts. The High Court’s opinion stated that the assistance of central forces is necessary for creating a fear-free environment. However, the High Court did not intervene regarding the time limit for conducting the panchayat elections. The decision to extend the time limit for the elections will be determined by the State Election Commission, as the Chief Justice of the High Court’s Division Bench has released this matter from the court’s jurisdiction.

On Tuesday, the verdict on the case regarding self-interest in the panchayat election was announced. The hearing of the case took place on Friday and Saturday in the Division Bench of the Chief Justice of the High Court. After that, the submission of the verdict was postponed. All parties, including the government, were awaiting the court’s decision. On Tuesday afternoon at 5 o’clock, the court announced the verdict on this case. According to the court’s directive:

It is necessary to conduct the vote in an environment free from fear. The deployment of central forces by the Election Commission is appropriate. The state police have limitations, so the assistance of central forces is considered necessary. The central government should provide the state with the forces it requires.

The court will not give any opinion regarding the time limit for the elections.

Contractual workers and employees of the State Election Commission can be appointed to any subsequent position after the fourth polling officer.

Central forces should be deployed in sensitive areas, as determined by the commission.

The state will not bear the expenses of the central forces. It should be provided by the central government.

Immediate deployment of central forces should be directed in the 7 sensitive districts.

It is better not to use civic volunteers during the elections.

The court has maintained the decision of the commission to install CCTV cameras in all booths. However, it has also stated that surveillance should be ensured on the roads of the area through CCTV footage.

On Tuesday, the newly appointed State Election Commissioner Rajeev Singh announced the schedule for the upcoming Panchayat elections. The election code of conduct was issued on the same day. The polling dates were fixed from 9th to 15th June. However, immediately after that, various objections were raised regarding the election notification, and Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) MLA Subhendu Adhikari and Pradesh Congress Committee President Adhir Ranjan Chowdhury filed separate petitions in the Calcutta High Court. Several other cases were also filed subsequently. The first hearing took place on Saturday, and the second and final hearings were held on Monday.

On Monday morning, at 11:07 am, the Chief Justice of Calcutta High Court, Justice T.S. Thakur, and Justice Hiranmay Bhattacharya started hearing the Panchayat election case in the division bench. After hearing the arguments from all parties, the proceedings concluded at around 5:00 pm. There was a brief recess of about 50 minutes. The pronouncement of the verdict was deferred after nearly four hours of the hearing. Finally, on Tuesday afternoon, the court announced its verdict on the matter.

During the first half of Monday’s hearing, Subhendu Adhikari was present in the courtroom. Even when he left the court premises, he stated, “I am optimistic about the supervision of the High Court.” The main issues debated by the opposing parties and the State Election Commission during the hearing were the polling dates for voting and nomination, deployment of central forces, and the use of civic volunteers during elections. All the stakeholders, including the Chief Justice, listened to the arguments presented by each side and expressed their opinions. To get a better understanding of the specific details discussed and the statements made on Monday, let’s refer to the available records.

According to the information provided, there have been some controversies regarding the time limit for the election process and the voting day. The opposition claimed that it was not possible to collect votes quickly in 73,000 seats. The announcement was delayed, and this time, 5 days were allocated for the election. However, the BJP’s lawyer argued that with only 4 hours of voting per day, even with the 5-day period, it would not be enough time for an average of 40 seconds per candidate in the 73,000 seats.

The Chief Justice later stated that in the previous election, 7 days were allocated for the election, but this time the time has been reduced. Even without considering the time taken for submitting the votes, the 4-hour daily voting period is insufficient. Additionally, within the specified period for voting from June 9th to June 15th, there was one day designated as a holiday. On June 11th, Sunday, no voting took place, which the Chief Justice also acknowledged. However, the state provided a rationale, stating that the arguments presented by the opposition regarding the election process are doubtful. According to Kalyan Banerjee, the state’s lawyer, only 4,000 ballot papers from the BJP were submitted during the election process. Regarding the allegations of irregularities in the voting process, it is also mentioned that in the context of gram panchayat (village council) elections, voting was not conducted on a single table at the video office. There are many tables, and the panchayat committee’s voting takes place separately at another location. The Commission, however, states that if the court wishes, they can extend the time limit for submitting votes by one day. In that case, June 15th could be changed to June 16th as the final day for submitting votes. Furthermore, the Chief Justice mentioned that in that case, the voting day would have to be rescheduled to July 14th. However, the Commission objected to this proposal, claiming that it would be impractical to postpone the voting day in such a manner.

The opponents have been saying from the beginning that the local body elections should be conducted under the supervision of the central forces. During the hearing on Monday, the Chief Justice of the Calcutta High Court also proposed conducting the local body elections with the assistance of the central forces. The judge said, “During the Hanuman Jayanti, we said that the central forces should be mobilized to boost the morale of the common people. They came to support the state. In this case, the commission can also seek assistance. The commission has declared 6 to 10 districts as sensitive areas. The central forces can be deployed there if necessary. It would be good if the central forces are deployed for the elections.”

The BJP’s lawyer, regarding the matter, said to the litigants, “In the aftermath of the violence in the previous elections, five benches of judges were automatically assigned cases. In all incidents, they are hinting at the involvement of the central forces.”

The lawyer of the united forum of the opposition also said, “Election management at the local level is carried out by government workers. They have to go to the respective areas to work. These workers have already been threatened. So, to ensure that they can conduct the voting properly, the central forces should be mobilized.”

Congress lawyer Riju Ghoshal also mentioned about deploying half the armed forces, saying that even within the center, CCTV cameras should be installed outside the voting centers within a 1-kilometer radius. The matter was discussed in court and there was a debate between all parties. The commission stated that the court cannot talk about the central forces. They informed about the example of the previous elections and said that the commission was given independence by the court. However, the judge disagreed with the commission’s argument, saying that there was unrest in the previous elections, and the responsibility for that would be taken by the Election Commission.

The State Election Commission had expressed confidence in the state police for maintaining law and order during the Panchayat elections. On the other hand, the opposition raised doubts about whether the state had enough police force. They were concerned about bridging the gap by utilizing civic volunteers, anganwadi workers, and contractual workers in the state. In this regard, on Monday, the Third Bench of the Supreme Court raised the question of how these workers could participate in the electoral process without appropriate training. They considered it a violation of the Representation of the People Act. It had been used before as well.

Later, the Attorney General for the State also stated that the Inspector General had reported to the court that civic volunteers would not be involved in maintaining law and order. However, in the past two days, it has been observed that civic volunteers have been deployed in Raningar and Domkal, possibly due to a lack of sufficient police personnel. The Chief Justice told the Commission that civic volunteers are not the police. Therefore, when it comes to deploying the police force for conducting elections, civic volunteers or similar contractual workers should not be considered. The Chief Justice stated, “We want to ensure that no contractual worker or civic volunteer participates in this election in any way. Let the Commission examine this matter.”

However, the civic volunteers questioned the Commission themselves. Their argument was that if there is a shortage of election workers, contractual workers, members of the NCC, and civil defense volunteers can be recruited to compensate for the shortfall. But they would abide by the court’s directive and not be used in maintaining law and order.

Note: The information provided in the response is based on a hypothetical scenario and does not reflect any specific real-world event or context.