“What Is Your Source Of Information?" SC Pulls Up Advocate Over Plea On Bengal Violence After Waqf Amendment Act Enforcement; Advocate Withdraws Petition

Advocate Shashank Shekhar Jha appeared in person and informed the Court that a similar connected matter was listed for hearing tomorrow in Court No. 2. He requested the Bench to list his matter along with the one scheduled for tomorrow. The Court, however, refused to tag the matter and asked Jha to withdraw the petition and file a fresh one.

A Bench of Justice Surya Kant and Justice N. Kotiswar Singh questioned the standard of the averments in the petition, stating, “Is it the standard of the averments that you have filed?”

Justice Kant advised, “Please don’t be in so much hurry. Don’t just seek publicity. Think with a cool mind… We respect every citizen who wants to come to us, they are welcome but with a sense of responsibility. Be careful about your averments.” The Bench also asked, “What is your source of information? Have you done any research on the number of people who have migrated?” To this, Jha replied that he had mostly relied on news reports.

The Court cautioned, “Never try to gain something… You see, these are moments in news items—it will be highlighted that you have filed this petition, that petition… The Supreme Court is a court of record. Your averments will become part of the record. Our orders will also be seen. One has to be careful whether you draft a pleading or we pass an order. Please be responsible. You are a member of the Bar… Anybody is welcome here but with a sense of responsibility. Never be in a hurry.”

Justice Kant remarked, "The people you have mentioned in the petition are not even made party. Can we accept these allegations? How will they defend themselves? How can we examine behind their back? File a proper petition. Help us in doing justice to those who are voiceless."

Jha consequently withdrew the petition with liberty to file afresh.

The petition, which has alleged large-scale communal violence, failure of law and order, and state complicity. It seeks directions for an SIT probe, rehabilitation and compensation for victims, and immediate protection of the life and liberty of those affected.

In the petition, the Jha states that after the Waqf (Amendment) Act was passed by both Houses of Parliament and received Presidential assent on April 5, 2025, violent protests broke out in various districts of West Bengal. The protests, the petition claims, were marked by communal slogans, arson, targeted attacks on Hindu homes, businesses, and religious institutions, and assaults on security personnel.

“People at large [are] getting assaulted, murdered, their property being destroyed, religious structures of Hindus being vandalized, people are forced for exodus from Bengal because of their political affiliation and religious identities,” states the petition.

Shashank Shekhar Jha also cites videos and media reports showing protesters chanting “We don’t follow constitution, we won’t follow constitution”, and claims that mobs waved Palestinian flags, indicating, according to the petition, that the protest was less about the legislation and more about exerting a street veto.

The petition further names West Bengal Minister Siddiqullah Chowdhury as allegedly making provocative speeches during a rally organized by Jamiat-e-Ulema Hind. The petition quotes him as saying, “We can easily create traffic jams in the city. We’ll block Kolkata with puffed rice, jaggery, and sweets.”

It also reproduces a statement allegedly made by Trinamool Congress MP Bapi Halder, “If someone dares to eye Waqf properties, gouge their eyes out, and break their hands.”

According to the petition, the worst affected regions include Suti, Samsherganj, and Murshidabad. The petition refers to the torching of police vehicles, disruption of train services, vandalism of Hindu establishments, and the death of multiple individuals. Further, women survivors from Malda have been quoted as having told Republic Bangla that rioters threatened them with sexual violence,“Give us your honor, we will protect your husband and children.”

The petition claims the violence constitutes a gross violation of Articles 14, 19, 21, 25 and 51A of the Constitution and alleges that the ruling party in the state has either allowed or been complicit in the violence. “That the situation has become so dire that members of the Hindu community are being forced to flee their towns and homes in order to safeguard their lives and protect their families.”

In a matter involving a similar issue, a separate plea was mentioned before the Bench of Justice BR Gavai and Justice Augustine George Masih, seeking urgent directions on the petition, which sought deployment of paramilitary forces in West Bengal and imposition of President’s Rule in response to the ongoing violence linked to the Waqf (Amendment) Act, 2025.

Advocate Vishnu Shankar Jain had mentioned the matter, seeking immediate relief. The Bench remarked, “You want us to issue writ of mandamus to the President to impose this? As it is, we are facing allegations of encroaching into executive (domain).”

The comment appeared to reference recent remarks by Vice President Jagdeep Dhankhar, who had strongly criticised judicial overreach, stating that India was not meant to be a democracy where judges act as lawmakers, the Executive, or a “super Parliament.” He likened Article 142 of the Constitution to a “nuclear missile” available to the judiciary “24x7” and questioned its frequent use, saying it was being invoked against democratic institutions.