The district administration in West Bengal’s Murshidabad failed to comply with the Election Commission’s order to file an FIR against Trinamool Congress MLA Manirul Islam in the vandalism incident at the office of the Farakka Block Development Officer (BDO) even 24 hours after the deadline to do so ended.
On Thursday, the EC had directed the Murshidabad District Electoral Officer (DEO) to file an FIR against the ruling party MLA from Farakka and send a compliance report by 5 pm the same day.
Though the case was not filed till 7 pm Friday, the DEO-cum-District Magistrate has asked the Farakka Sub-Divisional Officer (SDO) to investigate the matter, sources said.
The ransacking purportedly carried out by TMC supporters on January 14, was allegedly led by Islam, according to media reports and videos of the incident which have surfaced since.
Following the incident, the West Bengal Chief Electoral Officer (CEO) had called Director General of Police Rajeev Kumar and asked to take strict action in the matter. Even as the police filed an FIR in this connection, the MLA was not named in it.
This is not the first time the administration in the state has not complied with the EC’s instructions. On January 21, the EC asked West Bengal Chief Secretary Nandini Chakraborty to apprise within 72 hours what action had been taken against the two Electoral Registration Officers (EROs) and two Assistant Electoral Registration Officers (AEROs) accused of irregularities in the preparation of the voter list during the ongoing Special Intensive Revision (SIR) in the state.
The EC has even asked the Chief Secretary to report on the fact that the directive has not been implemented and send the report by 5 pm on Saturday.
The EC in its letter to the Chief Secretary stated, “A written explanation shall be called for from the competent authority/officer responsible for the aforesaid procedural lapse, clearly explaining the circumstances that led to non-compliance with the Commission’s instructions. In continuation of the Commission’s letter of even number dated 08.01.2026, you are requested to furnish the complete disciplinary case records, including the articles of charge, written statements of defence, inquiry reports, findings of the inquiry authority, orders of the disciplinary authority, file noting and all other relevant records forming the basis of the disciplinary action taken, in respect of all the four officials namely Shri Tathagata Mondal, Shri Debottam Dutta Choudhury, Shri Biplab Sarkar and Sh. Sudipta Das.”
The EC had on August 5 asked the state government to suspend and book four officials and a contractual employee for alleged fraudulent registration of 127 voters using forged documents in the Baruipur Purba and Moyna Assembly constituencies.
The four officials included two West Bengal Civil Service officers serving as EROs – Debottam Dutta Choudhury (Baruipur Purba), and Biplab Sarkar (Moyna) – and two AEROs – Tathagata Mondal (Baruipur), and Sudipta Das (Moyna).
The Commission had also sought action against Surojit Halder, a contractual data entry operator. He was suspended by the state government earlier.
CEO asks DEOs to take strict action over violence
Meanwhile, the West Bengal CEO directed all DEOs to take strict action if any violence occurs during the SIR hearing process.
In a letter to all DEOs, it was stated, “It is directed that in case of any law & order situation at hearing venues or in any of the Government offices in connection with SIR, 2026 and in case of any destruction of public property or any kind of threat / attack to any official/ staff involved in the SIR related work, DEOs should take steps for immediate filing of complaints/ FIR with the local police station with a copy mailed to Superintendent of Police and Office of the CEO, West Bengal.”
The letter further read, “In case violence and destruction of public property persists the hearings in such cases should be adjourned sine die and would commence only with the approval of the CEO, West Bengal. Delay in filing of FIR’s in such cases will be viewed very seriously and adverse inference shall be drawn against the concerned DEO.”