Calcutta HC orders CBI, SIT probes in post-poll violence cases in West Bengal

A five-member bench of the Calcutta High Court today rejected the allegation of bias by the National Human Rights Commission towards the ruling Trinamool Congress in West Bengal, and ordered a CBI investigation in all alleged cases of heinous crimes like rape and murder, while accepting the recommendations of an NHRC panel on the post-poll violence in the state. In a landmark 124-page judgment, the court also rejected the claim of the Mamata Banerjee government that it had not been in power when the post-poll violence in the state took place since the evening of May 2 – the day assembly poll results were announced - and continued for more than 10 days. The state government, through an affidavit in the Calcutta High Court, had said that the Election Commission was in charge of the law and order in West Bengal and that Banerjee controlled the violence once she took charge as chief minister on May 5.

The court, taking note of the submission made by the Advocate General Kishore Datta, said that the EC's job was only to ensure free and fair election and it does not prevent the state government from managing the state’s law and order.

The bench also ordered the constitution of an SIT, comprising three senior IPS officers of the state cadre, Suman Bala Sahoo, Soumen Mitra and Ranveer Kumar, to probe all other cases. Cases of murder, loot, rape and sexual harassment of women would be probed by the CBI. The bench will monitor both the investigations and has asked the two agencies to submit status reports to the court within six weeks.

Banerjee has called a meeting to discuss the order, but she is almost certain to move the Supreme Court against it. The NHRC named more than two dozen senior TMC leaders, including Minister Jyotipriyo Mullick, as accused. Two of them, Mullick and Partha Bhowmick, wanted their names to be removed from the case, but their plea was rejected.

It said that the working of the SIT will be overseen by a retired Judge of the Supreme Court for which a separate order will be passed after obtaining his/her consent. It is also not known where the cases would begin (whether in Delhi or West Bengal), as the only retired Supreme Court judge available in West Bengal is Justice A.K. Ganguly. If he is not chosen, then other retired judges would have to come to Kolkata to monitor the case.

On the allegations of bias, the bench headed by the Acting Chief Justice of Calcutta High Court Rajesh Bindal, said, “The entire effort seems to be to misdirect the issue and delay the proceedings. It seems to be an argument in frustration, where on the core issue, the State has been found on a wrong foot.”

“This court had directed constitution of the Committee vide order dated June 18, 2021. The members were nominated by the Chairperson of NHRC on June 21, 2021. No objection was raised by any one. An application was filed by the State for recalling of order dated June 18, 2021 vide which Committee was directed to be constituted. The application was dismissed on June 21, 2021 but no such argument was raised. It was not raised even when the committee started working on field. The Committee filed interim report in Court on June 30, 2021 and order was passed by the Court. No issue was raised. The same was sought to be raised only when final report was filed and it revealed the conduct of the state and the pleas raised by the State were found to be false.”

Another reason for rejection of the allegations of bias, said the bench, was that the members of the committee had only collected information from the field, collated the same and presented before the Court.

“Three members against whom allegations are sought to be made were not the only members in the exercise of collection of facts from the field. The committee consisted of nine members, having wide experience in different fields,” said the division bench in the order which is in the possession of THE WEEK.

The court also refuted the argument that the EC, and not the state government, was in charge of the state administration when the violence happened.

“Strong argument was sought to be raised by the learned Advocate General time and again that till such time election code was in force, entire police was under the control and supervision of the Election Commission of India, hence, it is responsible for any violence till May 03, 2021, when the code was lifted. 71. No provision of law rules or instructions to that effect have been referred in support of the argument. The argument deserves to be rejected outrightly. Civil or police administration is under the control of the Election Commission during the process of elections only to ensure free and fair elections. That does not mean that the police stop discharging its normal duties to control law and order.”

The bench said the State failed to register FIRs even in some cases of alleged murder. "This shows pre-determined mind to take investigation into a particular direction." It said allegations that the police had not registered a number of cases initially.

The bench also observed that the incidents are not isolated to one place in the state. "Rather the violence which erupted after polls and declaration of results was state-wide. Number of persons had died. The women were raped. The house of certain persons who had not supported the party in power were demolished. Their other properties were damaged. Their belongings were looted including the chattels.”

The bench said three months have lapsed since the matter was taken up by the court, but "no concrete action has been taken by the State, which could inspire confidence except filing affidavits and placing on record thousands of papers."

The bench also ordered the West Bengal government to pay compensation to the victims of crimes in accordance with the policy of the State, after due verification.

(With PTI inputs)