Calcutta High Court | While deciding a petition related to Ekbalpore – Mominpur communal violence on the eve of Laxmi Puja, the Division Bench comprising of Apurba Sinha Ray and Joymalya Bagchi, JJ., ordered the formation of a Special Investigation Team (SIT) of experienced police officers to probe into the unfortunate incident in the city of Kolkata.
In the present case, two petitions were filed by the petitioner alleging that the State Police administration remained a silent spectator to the flaring of communal violence in the Ekbalpore-Mominpur area on the eve of Laxmi Puja and prayed for various reliefs. The petitioner contended that steps were not taken to ensure protection of life and property of the members of the Scheduled Caste community affected by the riot and bombs were thrown in the locality but requisite steps under the National Investigation Agency (NIA) Act, 2008 were not taken. It was also stated by the petitioner that adequate compensation was not given to the victims and other restitutive measures were not taken.
The petitioner prayed that Central Para Military Forces be deployed in the area to maintain peace and the investigation to be conducted by National Investigating Agency as “there is gross apathy to conduct a fair and effective investigation into the acts of violence … Inefficiency of the State Police is evident from the fact that the Police Station itself was attacked”. The petitioner also prayed for providing compensation to victims and installation of CCTV cameras in the area.
From the preliminary report of the incident, it appears that five criminal cases were registered under Explosive Substance Act, 1908, Arms Act, 1959 and Penal Code, 1860 and 42 persons were arrested, 15 live bombs, 4 crude bombs and various other weapons have already been seized, and S. 144 CrPC was promulgated in the area to avoid any possibility of breach of peace and public tranquility.
The Court observed that three out of the five FIRs were registered under the Explosive Substances Act, 1908 and therefore asked the State through its counsel that whether the State has complied with the requirements of S. 6 of the National Investigation Agency Act, 2008 and the State through its counsel submits that an intimation is sent to Central Government in terms of S. 6(2) of NIA Act.
“6. Investigation of Scheduled Offences— (1) On receipt of information and recording thereof under Section 154 of the Code relating to any Scheduled Offence the officer-in-charge of the police station shall forward the report to the State Government forthwith.
(2) On receipt of the report under sub-section (1), the State Government shall forward the report to the Central Government as expeditiously as possible.
(3) On receipt of report from the State Government, the Central Government shall determine on the basis of information made available by the State Government or received from other sources, within fifteen days from the date of receipt of the report, whether the offence is a Scheduled Offence or not and also whether, having regard to the gravity of the offence and other relevant factors, it is a fit case to be investigated by the Agency.
(4) Where the Central Government is of the opinion that the offence is a Scheduled Offence and it is a fit case to be investigated by the Agency, it shall direct the Agency to investigate the said offence.
(5) Notwithstanding anything contained in this section, if the Central Government is of the opinion that a Scheduled Offence has been committed which is required to be investigated under this Act, it may, suo motu, direct the Agency to investigate the said offence.
(6) Where any direction has been given under sub-section (4) or sub-section (5), the State Government and any police officer of the State Government investigating the offence shall not proceed with the investigation and shall forthwith transmit the relevant documents and records to the Agency.
(7) For the removal of doubts, it is hereby declared that till the Agency takes up the investigation of the case, it shall be the duty of the officer-in-charge of the police station to continue the investigation.”
The Court observed that transfer of investigation to NIA is to be considered by the Central Government is already in process and FIRs were duly registered and investigation is in progress. But the Court is of opinion that due to the nature of the offence i.e. relate to communal disharmony between communities, the investigation needs a sensitive approach to it, therefore, the investigation be transferred to a superior investigating agency of the State Government.
The Court directed the constitution of SIT comprising of experienced police officers and headed by the Commissioner of Police, Kolkata. The Court directed the SIT to conduct the investigation in an effective and efficient manner and take all necessary and prompt steps for preservation and analysis of electronic evidence including video footages of the incident and take measure to ensure that the one who is responsible for the commission of the crime is apprehended.
The Court directed the Commissioner of Police to take necessary measures for prevention of similar offences and spread of communal hatred in the area. The Court also directed that the police pickets be re-enforced and lives and properties of the citizens be duly protected.
The Court opined that “if inhabitants of the locality have been displaced due to the communal disharmony, the government shall take immediate steps for their repatriation to the locality”.
The Court directed the Commissioner of Police to file a Comprehensive report regarding the progress in the investigation of the cases, law and order situation in the area, measures taken to prevent similar offences and the steps taken to protect life and property of the victims.
The Court also directed the State Government to submit a report disclosing the steps taken for compensation and/or rehabilitation of the victims of crime and the measures to restore communal peace and tranquility in the area.
The matter is listed on 14-11-2022.
[Nabendu Kumar Bandyopadhyay v. State of W.B., WPA (P) 528 of 2022, decided on 12-10-2022]
Advocates who appeared in this case :
Mr. Swatarup Banerjee, Mr. Lokenath Chatterjee, Mr. Sukanta Ghosh, Mr. Debanca Das, Ms. Amrita Pandey, Mr. Pradip Kumar Mondal, Ms. Anamika Pandey, Mr. Rajarsi Basu, Mr. Kuntal Ray, Ms. Tanushree Ghosh, Mr. Suman Chattopadhyay, Ms. Sanchita Burman Roy and Mr. R. Dutta, Counsel for the Petitioner
Mr. T.M. Siddiqui (Ld. AGP), Ms. Sangeeta Roy, Mr. Benazir Ahmed and Mr. Sayak Chakraborty, Counsel for the State
Mr. Billwadal Bhattacharya (Ld. Dy. S.G.I) and Mr. Kallol Mondal, Counsel for the CBI
Mr. Kaushik Gupta and Mr. Debanjan Mukherjee, Counsel for the CESC
*Ritu Singh, Editorial Assistant has put this report together.
