Read Time: 09 minutes

Synopsis

In the SLP filed before the Supreme Court of India by the family members of the victims of horrific West Bengal Post Poll Violence challenging the bail granted to two accused persons by the Calcutta High Court, today notice was issued to the respondents.

The division bench of Justice Bela M Trivedi and Justice Satish Chandra Sharma passed the order while orally observing that though the offence alleged against the accused persons were serious, but the consideration of the high court could not be said to be wrong.

Sr Adv Mahesh Jethmalani assisted by Advocate Shoumendu Mukherji argued that the high court had allowed the bail to the accused noting the delay in the trial and their long period of incarceration.

He also apprised the court that on the basis of these bails, two other accused have also been allowed the relief and the petitioner is now being threatened.

Through Advocate Shoumendu Mukherji, the plea has been filed by the brother of a deceased in the violence. The petitioner has alleged that his brother was killed in front of his mother while a mob had hurled a bomb on his house during the chaos. 

The SLP

Through the SLP, the petitioners, as an interim prayer, has sought stay on the impugned order granting bail to the two accused persons.

It is the petitioner's case that they were denied the right to be heard at the time of deciding the bail applications as no notice was issued to them before passing of the impugned order, despite them being present as a de-facto complainant in the previous bail hearings before the high court.

WB Post Poll Violence

West Bengal Post Poll Violence occurred in the aftermath of the West Bengal Vidhan Sabha Election Results on 2nd May 2021.

The petitioners before court are eye-witnesses to the incident who state that the attack on their family members was the very first incident in a long series of retributive and vengeful acts unleashed by party workers of the ruling political dispensation in the State of West Bengal against opposition party workers and supporters in the aftermath of the Vidhan Sabha Elections of 2021.

Filed through Advocate Shoumendu Mukherji, the plea submits that the high court recorded grounds of the accused not being named in the FIR, not named in the statement under Section 164 of the CrPC before the Magistrate and no specific role assigned to the accused in the statement under Section 164 CrPC. The high court further noted that there was dichotomy in the statements of the two witnesses and there was no material brought on record to show that accused had threatened witnesses during trial.

"Despite the Petitioner’s repeated appeals, a fabricated and falsified narration of events was C registered as the FIR. Even though Petitioner No.1 had submitted names of 20 accused persons on the date of the incident, however the same was not considered by the Police. Such was the dilatory and deliberate efforts on part of the local Police to shield the culprits, that the Hon’ble High Court vide order dated 19.8.2024 in WPA (P) 142 of 2021 on the basis of a scathing report submitted by the National Human Rights Commission (NHRC) on the reprehensible conduct of the local Police had deemed it fit to transfer the investigation in the present matter to the Respondent No.1 agency i.e. CBI along with other heinous incidents of murders and rapes....", the plea adds.

Throughout the proceedings, the petitioners have told the high court, that they have been threatened, intimidated, assaulted, physically molested by the relatives of the accused while they themselves were in custody.

"The Petitioners were even granted protection by the D Police and Central Forces under Court’s orders fearing threat to their lives, however despite such protection being given the attacks continued. The Petitioners have been threatened as recent as 10.8.2024 by the father of Respondent No.3 after passing of the impugned order. It is only a sign of things to come as the Respondent Nos 2 and 3 are known to influential persons in the ruling political dispensation and there is a clear threat to the Petitioners’ lives...", the SLP adds.

In this background, arguing that there is a likelihood that the attacks will continue with impunity, the SLP cites the settled law that when there is a high possibility of threat to the victims it is a just ground for cancellation of bail.

Case Title: Biswajit Sarkar vs. Central Bureau of Investigation and Ors.