State Withdrawing Such Cases Sends Wrong Message To Society: Calcutta HC Orders Fresh Trial In Ten Criminal Cases Tied To Nandigram Unrest

The Calcutta High Court has ordered a fresh trial in ten cases relating to murder and possession of illegal weapons, which took place during the unrest in Bengal's Nandigram region between the years 2007 and 2009.

A division bench of Justices Debangsu Basak and Md Shabbar Rashidi ordered the retrial and held: 

"More than 10 persons had been murdered in different incidents in a locality. Criminal cases with regard to such incidents must not, let alone should not, be allowed to be withdrawn under Section 321 of the Criminal Procedure Code on the ground of return of peace and tranquillity. Society cannot be at peace and tranquillity with murderers roaming around without the fear of prosecution. In such a situation, the so called peace and tranquillity is at a price which erodes the basic fabric of a law abiding society."

Such conduct of the State is inimical to public peace and administration of criminal justice. Eradication of violence of any form in a society is an ideal which a State should strive for. In a democracy, violence in any manner or form, either pre or post poll, should be eschewed. A State must exhibit zero tolerance towards any form of violence. Any attempt to justify a crime and clothing it with political issues is insufferable, they added.

These murders took place during the Nandigram agitation before the present ruling party was elected to the helm in the State. After their election in 2011, the state government withdrew the cases against the accused and such pleas were allowed by the trial court under Section 321 of the CrPC. 

In criticising the state for withdrawing prosecution against the accused, the court held:

State's action to undertake a process under Section 321 in criminal cases involving murders, in the facts and circumstances of the present case, has evenly ingredient to send a wrong signal to the society. It has the potential of being misinterpreted as condoning political violence when the Constitutional provisions obligates any State to disincentivise violence in any manner or form. Accused in the 10 criminal cases must stand trial. Murders did take place. Post-mortem reports available with the case diaries establish such fact.

Therefore, as on date, in the society there are persons who are guilty of such murders. Allowing the prosecution to withdraw under Section 321 of the Criminal Procedure Code will not be in public interest. In fact, it would cause public harm and injury. The decision of the State to apply under Section 321 of the Criminal Procedure Code in support of the criminal cases involved, not being founded upon any acceptable legal proposition or fact, cannot be said to be legal and valid, it added.

Accordingly, it directed for the accused to be tried afresh regardless of the withdrawal of the cases by the state government.

Case: Dipak Mishra Vs. The State of West Bengal & Ors.

Case No: WPA(P) 67 of 2021

Click here to read order