Calcutta High Court stays ECI memo naming 800 people as “Trouble-Makers” for Bengal elections, says it can’t issue such “blanket direction”

The Calcutta High Court on 22 April, 2026, stayed the operation of an Election Commission of India (ECI) memo that had identified nearly 800 individuals as “trouble-makers” allegedly involved in voter intimidation and electoral disturbances in West Bengal. The stay will remain in effect until the last day of June 2026 or until further orders.

A division bench comprising Chief Justice Sujoy Paul and Justice Partha Sarathi Sen passed the order while hearing a petition filed by one Md Danish Farooqi challenging the memo dated 21^st April 2026. The memo, issued by the Police Observer in the office of the Chief Electoral Officer, West Bengal, had directed authorities to take preventive action against the listed persons, which reportedly included elected representatives such as councillors, panchayat members, MLAs, and MPs, to ensure free, fair, and peaceful Assembly elections.

The court observed prima facie that the Police Observer had erred in issuing a “blanket direction” by treating certain citizens as “trouble-makers”. It noted that the term finds no recognition under any statute and that election-related offences are already covered under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), and the Representation of the People Act, 1951 (RP Act). “When the election related offences are prescribed in B.N.S. and R.P. Act, 1951, the authorities entrusted therein alone are competent to take action as per their own discretion if any such offence is committed,” the bench stated.

The bench emphasised that personal liberty under Articles 21 and 22 of the Constitution can be curtailed only in accordance with procedure established by law. Relying on the Supreme Court’s ruling in Satender Kumar Antil v. CBI, the High Court held that arrest or preventive action cannot be a routine or blanket exercise but must follow statutory discretion by competent authorities. It further cited the principle: “If a statute prescribes a thing to be done in a particular manner, it has to be done in the same manner and other methods are forbidden.”

The petitioner, Md Danish Farooqi, had argued that the ECI lacked authority to brand individuals as “trouble-makers” through a generalised order, describing the list as “stigmatic” and violative of the right to vote and personal liberty. Senior counsel for the ECI had defended the memo, claiming it was in line with the Manual on Vulnerability Mapping, 2023, and similar instructions issued in other states.

While staying the memo, the High Court clarified that the order does not prevent police or civil authorities from proceeding against any person who commits a cognisable offence under the BNS, RP Act, or any other penal law. Any preventive detention or action must strictly comply with relevant detention laws.

The bench granted the Election Commission four weeks to file an affidavit in opposition, with liberty to the petitioner to file a rejoinder. The matter has been listed after five weeks.

The development comes amid heightened tensions surrounding the 2026 West Bengal Legislative Assembly elections, where the ECI has been actively monitoring the poll process. The memo had been issued to address concerns over potential voter intimidation and disturbances.