A PIL before the Supreme Court seeks removal of IPS officer Ajay Pal Sharma as Police Observer in West Bengal, alleging intimidation, bias, and conduct that may affect election neutrality. It claims his continued role risks public confidence and threatens free and fair 2026 Assembly Elections, raising concerns over democratic integrity and lawful conduct of electoral processes.
A Public Interest Litigation (PIL) filed before the Supreme Court of India seeks urgent removal of IPS officer Ajay Pal Sharma from his role as Police Observer in West Bengal.
The petition alleges that Sharma’s conduct particularly intimidation, bias, and threats has put the free and fair character of the elections at risk. It argues that his continued presence may undermine public confidence in the 2026 Assembly Elections.
Filed under Article 32 of the Constitution, the PIL contends that citizens’ fundamental right to cast their votes in an atmosphere of free and fairness is presently threatened.
ALSO READ: Defamation Case: Former IPS Officer Amitabh Thakur Sent To 14 Days Judicial Custody
The petitioner further maintains that the Election Commission’s decision to appoint Sharma as an observer has compromised neutrality, and therefore warrants immediate judicial intervention in order to protect the integrity of the electoral process.
The petition states that, since taking charge in South 24 Parganas, Ajay Pal Sharma has allegedly carried out acts of intimidation and undue influence against political candidates.
It asserts that such conduct has allegedly altered the electoral contest by disturbing the level playing field required under election law and constitutional election norms.
The plea also highlights that Sharma frequently referred to as the “Singham of UP” for encounter operations has allegedly vitiates the electoral environment as an Election Commission observer.
The petitioner argues that an observer must function as a neutral constitutional authority, and that any indication of partiality can seriously weaken public trust in the electoral framework.
Citing provisions of the Representation of the People Act, 1951, the PIL notes that observers are meant to be appointed to independently monitor polling conditions and report violations. It claims that any departure from this independent and impartial role undermines the very purpose behind appointing observers and may erode public faith in elections.
Accordingly, the petitioner urges the Supreme Court to take suo motu cognisance of the allegations and direct the Election Commission to withdraw Sharma from observer duty in West Bengal. The petition emphasises that prompt action is necessary to safeguard electoral fairness while the election process is underway.
The PIL also points to recent ground-level tensions.
The petition adds that Sharma later issued a notice to the local Superintendent of Police seeking an explanation for this alleged excess deployment.
The legal challenge arises as West Bengal proceeds through a tightly contested Assembly election. Campaigning for the second and final phase has ended, with 142 constituencies scheduled to vote on April 29.
The polls are being held with substantial security deployment across districts due to the state’s record of political clashes. The election authorities recorded voter turnout of 93.2% in the first phase described as a record.
While the Trinamool Congress and the Bharatiya Janata Party each claim that this extraordinary participation benefits their side, the high turnout is also said to increase scrutiny of security arrangements and the conduct of central observers such as Ajay Pal Sharma.
ALSO READ: IAS Officers Try to Show Supremacy Over Other IPS and IFS Officers
The petition notes that Sharma was born in Ludhiana and serves in the Uttar Pradesh cadre. It states that he has previously worked in districts including Rampur, Shamli, Jaunpur, and Hathras. The petitioner argues that this policing record especially the encounter-related history should have heightened the need for strict neutrality when appointing observers for a politically sensitive state such as West Bengal.
Ultimately, the case links Sharma’s alleged policing methods, reported protests in West Bengal, and the statutory framework governing observers under the Representation of the People Act.
The outcome, according to the PIL, is likely to directly affect Sharma’s role as Police Observer and may also influence how observer appointments are handled in future major elections.
Case Title: Aditya Das v. Election Commission of India