Khukumani Mondal And Others vs The State Of West Bengal And Others
2023 Latest Caselaw 6017 Cal

                         HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA

                  CONSTITUTIONAL WRIT JURISDICTION

Present:

THE HON'BLE JUSTICE JAY SENGUPTA

                                     WPA 21883 of 2023
                               Khukumani Mondal and others
                                               vs.
                               The State of West Bengal and others




  For the petitioner                  Mr. Rajdeep Majumder
                                      Mr. Moyukh Mukherjee
                                      Ms. Sagnika Banerjee



  For the State                      Mr. Sk. Md. Galib
                                     Mr. Tamal Taru Panda

  For the Union of India              Mr. Ashoke Kumar Chakraborti, ld. ASG
                                     Mr. Arun Kumar Maity (Mohanty)
                                     Mr. Tirtha Pati Acharyya


 For the Intervening party           Mr. Sudipto Moitra
                                     Mr. Abhijit Singh



 Heard on                            08.09.2023

 Judgment on                         08.09.2023

 JAY SENGUPTA, J:


                  This    is    an   application   under   Article   226   of   the

            Constitution of India praying for direction upon the respondent

authorities to provide protection to the petitioners for the

formation of board of members of Sthayee Samiti of Khejuri-II

Development Block as and when scheduled, to take action

under the Explosive Substances Act on the complaints lodged

by the petitioners, to preserve the CCTV footages and to properly

investigate the case on the complaints of the petitioners and

other aggrieved persons.

Affidavit of service filed in Court is taken on record.

A report filed by the State is also taken on record.

A vakalatnama filed on behalf of the Intervener is also

taken on record.

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits as follows. The

petitioners are the winning candidates belonging to the

opposition political party in the panchayat election of 2023.

Three of them are pachayat pradhans, one is a zilla parishad

member and others are panchayat samiti members. They were

supposed to participate in a meeting of Sthayee Samiti on 5th

September, 2023 at 12 noon at the Meeting Hall of Khejuri-II

Panchayat Samiti. Apprehending that the miscreants belonging

to the ruling political dispensation would try to prevent them

from doing so, they moved a writ petition before this Court. By

an order dated 04.09.2023 passed in WPA 21535 of 2023, this

Court, inter alia, directed the respondent authorities to keep a

sharp vigil at the locale so that no breach of peace takes place

and to provide police escort to the petitioners therein, so that

they can travel to the meeting hall. The entire travel was to be

videographed. In addition, the petitioners were granted relief of

"not to arrest" in respect of Khejuri PS Case No.25 dated

20.01.2021, till 06.09.2023. However, the police personnel

failed to maintain peace. Inside the meeting hall, the petitioners

were attacked by the miscreants with arms. There was a chaos.

The petitioners as well as the BDO were assaulted. The meeting

could not be held and had to be postponed. More importantly,

outside the meeting hall violent attacks were orchestrated by the

miscreants. Bombs were hurled. In spite of all these and

despite there being complaints filed by the petitioner No.7, no

action was taken. It is learnt that later on, an FIR was lodged,

but without any provision of the Explosive Substances Act. This

is a deliberate attempt by the police authorities to somehow

keep away the National Investigating Agency from coming into

the picture. The provision of the Explosives Act that was

included was absolutely irrelevant. On this, reliance is placed in

a decision passed by a Division Bench of this Court in Arijit

Majumder vs. State of West Bengal reported at 2022 SCC OnLine

Cal 4433. The police are still trying to prevent the truth from

coming out. Therefore, FIRs may be lodged also under the

provisions of the Explosive Substances Act and the meeting be

conducted under the CRPF protection. The petitioners also pray

for changing the venue of the meeting.

Learned senior advocate for the Intervenor submits as

follows. The Intervenor is an octogenarian Member of the

Parliament of the local constitutuency. He has a right to

participate in the meeting and vote. His right was also infringed

because of such unruly behaviour and inability of the police

authorities to prevent the turmoil. While the Intervenor was

returning from the meeting, his car was pelted with stones by

miscreants. The car was severely damaged. They were somehow

rescued by the CRPF. Despite the fact that the intervenor is a

"Y" Category Protectee, no FIR has been lodged in this regard.

Learned advocate for the State relies on the report and

submits as follows. The allegations made in the petition are

denied. The State employed as many as 29 SI/ASI, 95

constables/HG/NVF, 6 Sec. RAF, 1 Sec. Lady RAF, 30

LC/LHG/LNVF/LCV and 142 CV/VP for traffic duty. Therefore,

the deployment of personnel was quite adequate. In spite of

this, the situation went beyond control. This was an unforeseen

incident. However, the police would take adequate steps and

deploy more personnel on the next date that would be fixed for

such meeting. So far as the incidents that took place on the

particular day, two FIRs were lodged and one FIR was also

lodged in respect of the attack on the MP. Bombs, if any, were

hurled outside the area in which order under Section 144 of the

Code was promulgated. It could be that due to the inadvertence,

instead of the Explosive Substances Act, FIRs were registered

under the Explosives Act. However, it does not mean that the

police had any ulterior motive. In respect of the FIR lodged

regarding the stone pelting on the car, the investigation is

continuing and two persons have already been arrested. In

respect of the two other cases, six accused have been arrested

as yet. The police authorities are agreeable to shift the venue of

the meeting to the Office of the District Magistrate. In his FIR,

the BDO has mentioned that the fight took place between the

elected members.

Learned senior counsel representing the Union of India

submits that as per Section 6 of the NIA once the charges under

the Explosive Substances Act are added in a case, it is the duty

of the State to inform the Central Government who would have

to decide whether the NIA would investigate the matter.

I have heard the submissions of the parties and have

perused the writ petition and the report filed by the State.

It appears that despite an earlier order passed by this

Court requiring the respondent authorities to maintain peace,

the meeting of the Sthayee Samiti for Khejuri-II Panchayat

Samiti could not be taken place. There were attacks by armed

miscreants outside the venue hall. Bombs were allegedly hurled.

However, it also appears that the police authorities had

deployed quite a number of personnel to ensure security.

So far as the FIRs relating to the violence that took place

at or outside the venue of the meeting are concerned, only

charges under the provisions of Explosives Act were imputed,

but not under the applicable Explosives Substances Act.

As regards the FIR regarding the attack on the

octogenarian MP, the issue is very serious and can better be

dealt with in a separate application. As of now, the police

authorities shall investigate the matter with diligence and

promptitude.

As has already been agreed by the respondent authorities

and for ensuring that the proposed meeting can be held

peacefully, let the venue of the meeting be shifted to the Office of

the District Magistrate.

On the date that would be fixed for the meeting the

Superintendent of Police, Purba Medinipur district shall deploy

adequate number of police personnel which shall not be less

than what was deployed on the earlier occasion. They shall also

seek help of the CRPF who shall upon their request deploy

adequate number of personnel for the purpose of ensuring

security on the particular day.

Considering the gravity of the situation and the lapses

already committed by the present investigating officer, let the

cases, for the present, be investigated by the concerned SP

himself.

As had already been discussed, the investigating agency

shall add relevant provisions of the Explosives Substances Act

in the array of charges in the two FIRs.

With the aforesaid observations, the writ petition is

disposed of.

Urgent certified copy of this order, if applied for, be

supplied to the parties upon compliance of all requisite

formalities.

(Jay Sengupta, J)

SG/7