EC withdraws 'worry list' order after High Court warns against unnecessary arrests
Telegraph | 29 April 2026
The high court on Tuesday expressed faith in the “competent authorities” and said it was confident they would not resort to preventive detention or arrest of persons except where it was “absolutely essential”.
The court was referring to an order issued by the Election Commission on Monday night, directing the Bengal director general of police to take action against over 3,000 people, mostly Trinamool functionaries. The EC described it as a “worry list”.
On Tuesday, advocate Danish Farooqui moved a bench of Justices Arijit Banerjee and Partha Sarathi Sen against the order. Hours after Farooqui moved court, the EC issued another order withdrawing Monday’s communication.
Last week, Farooqui had challenged a similar EC directive to police that listed around 800 names and asked them to “take action”. The court had stayed its execution and observed that it was an error on the part of the police observer to have shared the list with the police.
As the latest order was withdrawn, the court refrained from passing a formal direction on Tuesday, but said: “We trust and believe that ECI, which is a constitutional authority, and all its officers, including observers appointed by it, shall discharge their respective duties in the election process fairly, efficiently, impartially, without any bias, political or otherwise and strictly in accordance with law.”
It added: “It cannot be gainsaid that it is in the interest of all the citizens of this State that the election scheduled to be held tomorrow (April 29, 2026) is held in a fair, transparent and peaceful manner where each member of the electorate will be able to exercise his franchise freely without any fear…
“We are also sure that the competent authorities will not resort to preventive detention or arrest of persons, excepting where the same is absolutely essential and that too, in accordance with law. One must keep in mind the paramount importance of a citizen’s fundamental right to personal liberty enshrined in Article 21 of the Constitution of India, which can be curtailed only by following due process of law.”
Senior advocate Kalyan Banerjee, appearing for Farooqui, submitted that by issuing Monday’s order, the EC had committed contempt of the earlier court order that stayed a similar “take action” directive.
Representing the EC, advocate Jishnu Chowdhury ruled out any contempt, saying the order had been withdrawn.
Banerjee expressed apprehension that the EC may again pass such an order and sought a direction restraining it from doing so. The bench, however, did not pass such a direction.