Calcutta High Court Directs Police To Escort Poll Violence Victims Back To Their Homes
Those who were molested and assaulted shall be provided escort by the local police to go back to their home, the Calcutta High Court directed on Monday in the aftermath of post poll violence in West Bengal.A division-bench of Chief Justice T.S. Sivagnanam and Justice Hiranmay Bhattacharya further directed that complaints, if already registered, must be investigated and the Police...
Those who were molested and assaulted shall be provided escort by the local police to go back to their home, the Calcutta High Court directed on Monday in the aftermath of post poll violence in West Bengal.
A division-bench of Chief Justice T.S. Sivagnanam and Justice Hiranmay Bhattacharya further directed that complaints, if already registered, must be investigated and the Police Superintendent of the concerned district shall monitor the restoration and the probe.
The direction was issued in a petition filed by Advocate Priyanka Tibrewal alleging large-scale violence "at the behest of the ruling dispensation". She sought conduct of re-poll, and handing over of the investigation to the CBI.
It was submitted that complaints were made in a supplementary affidavit by almost 400 people who were victims of poll-violence, as well as those who were displaced from their homes and are unable to go back. Affidavits included grievance of two women gram sabha candidates who were allegedly molested, assaulted and humiliated, as well as driven out of their homes, and were unable to return.
Tiberwal submitted one of the women was "stripped on the day of elections and the other was molested on the day of counting".
Court thus ordered,
“Those who were molested and assaulted shall be provided escort by the local police to go back to their homes. Complaints if already registered to be investigated, and the SP of the concerned district to monitor the restoration and probe. The ASG has alleged non-cooperation by SEC. The central government has extended stay of forces for ten more days with prayer that they may be withdrawn in a phased manner. Until the SEC shares the requisite information with the BSF nodal officer, no purpose would be served in retaining the forces. Areas where disturbance is continuing must be identified so that the forces can be sent there. No further supplementary affidavits shall be entertained and the court expects that no allegations shall be made across the bar that copies were not served, before the date for next hearing. The submission of maintainability has been taken on record. The State shall provide seamless support to the central forces in the process of phased withdrawal.”
During the hearing, the bench also took stern exception to a party filing intervention application, bearing averments identical to an independent writ petition filed by them, concerning the Panchayat Elections. The application was filed in a petition moved by Congress leader Adhir Ranjan Chowdhury.
Intervenors argued that the application was filed prior to the filing of their writ petition, and that due to limitations in adjoining supplementary affidavits to the intervention application, another writ petition had been preferred.
The Bench was however not impressed by these submissions, and stated that if the advocate had been looking out for the interests of the Court, then they would have sought leave to file a supplementary affidavit at an earlier stage. It orally remarked:
“You have a writ petition, but you file another intervention in Adhir Ranjan Chowdhurys matter. These are identical. Do you think you are showing your strength by doing that? We will not be bogged down. Why are you multiplying proceedings? You cannot intimidate us like this. Either you withdraw the intervention application, or we will dismiss it with exemplary costs. Payable in 24 hours. Be fair to the court. You could have prayed leave to urge some more points in your writ petition or make a supplementary affidavit. You chose not to. You are an officer of the court… [your client] is supposed to be a big politician…are you trying to play politics in the Court? Very sorry [state of affairs].”
The application was finally dismissed with a direction to the intervenors to pay costs of Rs 1 lakh to the State Legal Services Authority within a period of 48 hours.
Coram: Chief Justice T.S. Sivagnanam and Justice Hiranmay Bhattacharya
Case: PRIYANKA TIBREWAL VS STATE OF WEST BENGAL AND ORS.