Sandeshkhali Violence: Calcutta HC Expresses Anguish That It Took Four Years To File Chargesheet In Earlier Cases From Sandeshkhali, Clarifies That There Is No Stay On Arrest Of Sheikh Shahjahan
The Calcutta High Court today clarified that there is no interim order of stay of the arrest of TMC leader Sheikh Shahjahan in any of the cases pending before it and that the said person should be arrested as soon as possible. The High Court was hearing the suo moto case registered by it in response to the newspaper reports of alleged sexual assault, violence and land grabbing in Sandeshkhali, North 24 Parganas, West Bengal.
The Court noted during the hearing that the issue in Sandeshkhali is not one of recent origin and expressed anguish over the fact that in earlier cases of a similar nature from Sandeshkhali, it took four years for the Police to file chargesheets.
The Bench of Chief Justice T.S. Sivagnanam and Justice Hiranmay Bhattacharyya also impleaded Sheikh Shahjahan, the Pradhan of Zila Parishad, the Central Beauro of Investigation, the Enforcement Directorate, State Home Secretary, Director General of Police, Superintendent of the concerned district and the OC of concerned police stations.
The Court also directed the Registry to issue a public notice to one leading Bangla newspaper and one English newspaper having wide circulation throughout the State that Sheikh Shahjahan has been added as a Respondent in the case, as the police have not been able to trace him.
Advocate Priyanka Tiberwal submitted that the women of the affected area are facing issues registering their complaints before the police authorities as they were acting as “co-conspirators” with the Accused. The Court suggested that such victims can approach the District Legal Services Authorities (DLSA) without disclosing their identities to protect their privacy.
The Advocate General appearing for the State submitted that for the last four years up to December 18, 2023, forty-three FIRs have been registered, including under Section 376 of IPC. Out of this, forty-two have resulted in chargesheet and investigation is pending in the remaining cases. Secondly, so far as the grabbing of lands is concerned, seven cases were filed. Thirdly, since February 8, 2024, twenty-four cases have been filed on various allegations, including land grabbing. Various arrests have been made already, according to him.
The High Court reprimanded the authorities and expressed anguish as regards the fact that the alleged offences and incidents of land grabbing were reported four years ago, and yet no action was taken.
The Court observed, “It is rather surprising to note that the incidence in that particular area had been reported to the state police four years ago and it is furthermore surprising that it has taken four years for forty-two cases to measure into chargesheets. It is not clear as to the manner of investigation under what are the provisions under which the charge it has been laid which will be examined by the Court at a later date.”
Further, Advocate Priyanka Tiberwal submitted that Section 144 Cr.P.C. is acting as a barrier preventing the victims from registering FIRs, while MLAs, Ministers, panchayat officers, etc. of the ruling party are freely visiting the affected area and intimidating people. She emphasized that Section 144 Cr.P.C. should be applied uniformly to everyone.
The Advocate General responded to it by saying that after imposition of Section 144 Ministers, Panchayats officers, etc. did not visit Block No. 1, but they visited Block No. 2 of Sandeshkhali. The imposition of Section 144 Cr.P.C. is limited to an area of 15 sq. km. in Block No. 2, according to him.
During the hearing, the Court dismissed a PIL filed by a Lawyer of the High Court on the subject. The Bench observed that without visiting the place or having first-hand information, the PIL has been filed on the basis of newspaper reports.
The Court then orally remarked that “People can't be walking in all the time and expressing their sorrow. People are already agitated, what is the fun of hundreds of people visiting? Does it make him a hero? Let law takes its course, all the time people going there may have an unpredictable effort. Those people are not exposed to city life.”
Cause Title: Court On Its Own Motion v. State of West Bengal (WPA 4011 of 2024)
