An application has been moved in the Supreme Court alleging that West Bengal Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee's personal appearance before the apex court in the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) case was "constitutionally improper" and "legally untenable".
On February 4, Banerjee became the first serving Chief Minister to personally argue a case before the Supreme Court. During the hearing, she urged the court to intervene in the ongoing SIR of electoral rolls in West Bengal, claiming the exercise was undermining democracy and that the state and its people were being unfairly targeted.
A bench comprising Chief Justice Surya Kant and Justices Joymalya Bagchi and N V Anjaria is scheduled to hear on Monday a batch of petitions, including Banerjee's plea, concerning the SIR process in the state.
The application has been filed by Satish Kumar Aggarwal, former vice-president of the Akhil Bharat Hindu Mahasabha. He contended that the Chief Minister's personal presence in court could exert "symbolic pressure" on the judiciary and affect the fairness of the proceedings.
'Not a private matter'
The petition further argues that the matter is not a private dispute but one directly involving the state. As such, it contends that the Chief Minister should have placed her case before the court through lawyers representing the state government, instead of appearing in person. "The subject matter of the aforesaid writ petition filed by the petitioner is not a personal or private dispute, but concerns matter of state governance and the constitutional exercise of powers by the Election Commission of India in conducting the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls in accordance with the Constitution of India and the applicable election laws," the application said.
It said the issues raised directly impact the institutional functioning of West Bengal and its constitutional relationship with the Election Commission.
It argued that individuals occupying high constitutional offices should avoid personal appearances in court, as such actions could undermine the dignity of the proceedings and risk personalising matters of constitutional and institutional significance.
"In such circumstances, the petitioner, being the incumbent chief minister, cannot claim to appear in a personal capacity, and any representation before this court must necessarily be through duly appointed advocates representing the state of West Bengal," the application said.
'Constitutionally improper, and legally untenable'
It said the state of West Bengal is already adequately represented through its appointed counsel in the matter, and no occasion arises for the personal appearance of Banerjee in proceedings of such nature.
"The applicant respectfully submits that such personal appearance by a sitting chief minister is constitutionally improper, institutionally undesirable, and legally untenable, as it runs contrary to settled judicial conventions, established court practice, and principles of judicial discipline, particularly in proceedings where professional legal representation is already in place," it said.
The petition also questions whether Mamata Banerjee had the right to file a petition under Article 32 of the Constitution in this case, as it does not involve the violation of any of her fundamental rights.
On February 4, the top court issued notices and sought replies by February 9 from the Election Commission and the chief electoral officer of West Bengal on the petition filed by Banerjee.
On January 19, the top court passed a slew of directions, observing that the SIR process in West Bengal should be transparent and not cause any inconvenience.
Also Read: Bengal SIR hearing: Mamata Banerjee reaches Supreme Court, set to argue her own case today
Also Read: Delhi Police rejects Mamata Banerjee's claims, says 'deployment at Banga Bhawan part of security'
