The 'Singham' Controversy: Supreme Court PIL Seeks Immediate Ouster of UP IPS Officer from Bengal Poll Duty

Massive judicial drama has just collided with the do-or-die climax of the West Bengal Assembly Elections. As ballots are actively being cast across the state today, Wednesday, April 29, 2026, a high-stakes Public Interest Litigation (PIL) has been filed in the Supreme Court demanding the immediate removal of a controversial UP-cadre IPS officer currently serving as an Election Commission Police Observer.

Filed late Tuesday night under Article 32 of the Constitution by petitioner Aditya Das, the PIL directly challenges the Election Commission's deployment of IPS officer Ajay Pal Sharma in the highly volatile South 24 Parganas district.

The plea argues that Sharma has completely abandoned his constitutional mandate under Section 20B of the Representation of the People Act, 1951, which explicitly requires observers to act as a "neutral institutional safeguard." Instead, the petitioner accuses Sharma of being "highly partisan," claiming he is actively engaging in "acts of intimidation" and "undue influence" that specifically target political candidates and destroy the level playing field required for free and fair elections.

The push to remove Sharma stems from an intense, localized confrontation that the Trinamool Congress (TMC) claims is definitive proof of central bias. Widely known as the "Singham of UP Police," Sharma is a recognized "encounter specialist" with a record of over 500 police encounters.

The tipping point occurred when a video went viral showing Sharma aggressively confronting the family and supporters of local TMC candidate Jehangir Khan. In the footage, Sharma reportedly "reads the riot act" to Khan's cadre and formally demands a written explanation from the local Superintendent of Police regarding why Khan had four more security personnel deployed than his designated 'Y-category' status legally permitted.

A similar petition attempting to oust Sharma was filed before the Calcutta High Court earlier this week. However, Justice Krishna Rao refused to intervene, strictly stating that the court would not pass orders against any officer currently on active election duty until after the final phase of polling concludes today. This judicial deadlock prompted the urgent, midnight escalation to the Supreme Court.

The BIGSTORY Reframe — Weaponizing the Observer

While the legal arguments cite the Representation of the People Act, the "Missed Angle" here is the intense psychological warfare being waged through the Election Commission's bureaucratic appointments.

By specifically deploying a famous, hardline UP "encounter specialist" to South 24 Parganas—a deeply entrenched TMC stronghold with a dark history of severe poll violence—the BJP-led Centre sent a very loud, intimidating message to local party cadres. The TMC views Sharma not as a neutral referee, but as an active, uniformed adversary sent to paralyze their local ground game and instill fear in their booth workers.

Because the High Court refused to act and the Supreme Court is unlikely to hear the plea before voting ends at 6:00 PM tonight, Sharma’s authority remains absolute. He effectively retains total control of the district's central security apparatus during the most critical, highly polarized hours of the entire election.

What This Means for the Election

• Institutional Distrust: The aggressive legal push against Sharma highlights the complete breakdown of trust between the state government and the Election Commission, matching Mamata Banerjee's ongoing allegations that central forces are operating as "BJP polling agents."
• Post-Poll Scrutiny: If the Supreme Court ultimately rules that Sharma acted beyond his constitutional mandate, it could trigger widespread TMC demands for repolling across multiple booths in South 24 Parganas.
• The Intimidation Precedent: Deploying high-profile "tough cop" observers may become a standard operational tactic for the central government in future state elections where local police are perceived as heavily compromised.

With the Supreme Court unlikely to intervene before the 6:00 PM cutoff, the ultimate question remains: has the Election Commission’s mandate for "neutral observation" officially been weaponized into a tool for psychological warfare?

Sources

News & Wire Coverage:

• LiveLaw: PIL in Supreme Court seeks removal of UP-cadre IPS officer as Police Observer in West Bengal Assembly Polls
• Bar and Bench: "Highly partisan": Plea in SC against Election Commission deploying UP 'encounter specialist' in South 24 Parganas
• The Indian Express: Bengal polls: TMC alleges bias as viral video shows EC observer Ajay Pal Sharma confronting candidate's family
• The Times of India: Calcutta HC refuses to intervene in plea against EC observer 'Singham' Ajay Pal Sharma; petitioner moves SC