Calcutta HC Grants Anticipatory Bail to TMC Members in 2021 Post-Poll Violence Murder Case

A young man in Kolkata’s Narkeldanga area on May 2, 2021, was killed allegedly by a mob of 7-8 persons following the declaration of election results. The victim’s mother alleged that assailants stormed her house, assaulted her family, and fatally attacked her son. A case was initially registered at Narkeldanga police station, and later handed over to the CBI pursuant to a Calcutta High Court order in August 2021 after a PIL on post-poll violence.

The CBI, which took charge of the probe on August 25, 2021, filed its first supplementary chargesheet the following month against 20 accused. Four years later, in 2025, the agency filed a second supplementary chargesheet naming fresh accused, including ruling party MLA from Beleghata Constituency Paresh Paul, Kolkata Municipal Corporation (KMC) councillors Swapan Somaddar and Papiya Ghosh, and TMC political activist Rajdip Singh.

The agency’s case rested on two key pieces of evidence: a speech delivered by Paul 12 days before the incident, where he threatened to evict the victim and his brother from the locality, and video clips recorded by the deceased himself before his death, accusing Paul and others of harassment, violence, and destruction of property. Singh was later named by the victim’s brother as one of the assailants, though his counsel denied this, calling it an “afterthought".

The counsel for the applicants argued that they were not named in the original FIR, had never been arrested in the four years of investigation, and had cooperated fully with the probe. They contended the charges were politically motivated, designed to implicate ruling party members ahead of the 2026 Assembly elections. Senior counsel representing them cited Supreme Court rulings in Siddharth v. State of Uttar Pradesh & Anr (2022), Aman Preet Singh v. Central Bureau of Investigation (2022), and Tarsem Lal v. Directorate of Enforcement, Jalandhar (2024) that discourage sudden custodial remand of accused who were never arrested during investigation.

The CBI and the complainant’s counsel opposed the bail plea, stressing the gravity of the murder, the influential positions of the applicants, and the potential threat to witnesses.

After examining the case records, the High Court noted that most of the evidence cited against the applicants had been available to the CBI since 2021, yet they were not chargesheeted until 2025. Court held that mere presence at a political rally or delivery of a provocative speech, without direct evidence of instigation or participation in the murder, could not justify custodial detention at this stage.

Court granted anticipatory bail to all four accused with strict conditions. Court ordered that they must each furnish a bond of Rs.1 lakh with two sureties, avoid contact with witnesses, stay away from the victim’s locality in Narkeldanga until completion of trial, and not leave India without permission. Additionally, Paul was restrained from making provocative speeches about the victim’s family.

Significantly, in view of fresh allegations that Singh threatened the victim’s brother during pendency of the proceedings, court directed initiation of a proceeding under Section 129 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita for good behaviour.