In a significant order ahead of the Bar Council of West Bengal elections, the Calcutta High Court has stepped in to address serious irregularities in the voter list. The Court directed authorities to revise the electoral roll, stressing that no advocate can be allowed to vote more than once.
Background of the Case
The case arose from a petition filed by Gautam Das, who challenged the final electoral roll prepared for the Jalpaiguri Bar Association booth. He alleged that multiple names were either duplicated or appeared across voter lists of different bar associations.
According to the plea, several advocates who were members of other associations such as Murshidabad and Siliguri were also included in the Jalpaiguri list. In some cases, a single voter’s name appeared more than once, raising concerns about the fairness of the election process.
The petitioner argued that such discrepancies could distort the election outcome and violate the principle of “one person, one vote.”
Justice Shampa Dutt (Paul), while hearing the matter, noted that the issue was not a minor or individual grievance but one that could affect the integrity of the entire election.
“The irregularity is admitted and thus palpably erroneous against Election Rules,” the Court observed.
The Court emphasized that even if an advocate is associated with multiple bar associations, they are entitled to cast only a single vote. Allowing multiple entries in different voter lists, it said, directly undermines free and fair elections.
Rejecting the respondent’s argument that corrections were not possible due to the advanced stage of election preparations, the Court remarked that administrative inconvenience cannot override electoral fairness.
It further held that seeking consent from voters before removing duplicate entries was itself improper.
“Such a stand is clearly in violation of the rules of a free, transparent and fair election,” the bench noted.
The Court relied on the Certificate and Place of Practice (Verification) Rules, 2015, which require advocates to be associated with a single place of practice for voting purposes.
It also referred to Supreme Court rulings highlighting the importance of judicial intervention where electoral fairness is at risk. The Court clarified that while courts generally avoid interfering in ongoing elections, they must step in where there is clear evidence of irregularities affecting the level playing field.
Concluding that the electoral roll contained admitted discrepancies, the High Court directed the election authorities to take immediate corrective steps.
“The respondents shall take immediate steps to ensure that under no circumstance a voter casts his/her votes more than once,” the Court ordered.
It further directed that the final electoral roll for the Jalpaiguri Bar Association booth be revised and corrected. The entire exercise must be completed and a fresh list published before the scheduled election.
The writ petition was accordingly disposed of with these directions.
Case Details
Case Title: Gautam Das vs. High Powered Election Committee & Ors.
Case Number: WPA 334 of 2026
Judge: Justice Shampa Dutt (Paul)
Decision Date: 02 March 2026
Counsels:
- Petitioner: Mr. Soumya Majumder (Sr. Adv.) & team
- Respondents: Mr. Bijoy Bikram Das, Mr. Sagar Bandyopadhyay
