[Sandeshkhali] Shahjahan Sheikh Was An Elected Representative, Should He Not Be Removed From Office? Calcutta High Court Enquires

The Calcutta High Court on Thursday took up the suo moto motion on the alleged sexual assault on women and land grabbing of tribals which took place in Sandeshkhali at the behest of prime accused Shahjahan Sheikh, a former member of the ruling TMC party, and elected Pradhan of the concerned Zilla Parishad. 

Earlier, a division bench presided over by Chief Justice TS Sivagnanam had directed for Sheikh's custody to be handed over to the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) in the matter of assault on ED officers in Sandeshkhali who were en route to raid him in connection with the ration scam.

Today, a division bench of CJ TS Sivagnanam and Justice Hiranmay Bhattacharya was seized of the suo moto matter, as well as pleas filed by various parties on the alleged mistreatment of locals of Sandeshkhali at the hand of Shahjahan and his people, leading to widespread unrest in the area.

The Bench upon hearing the advocates, enquired whether Shahjahan Sheikh, who was an elected leader of the Zilla Parishad could continue in his post while being in custody, and whether his involvement in the administrative affairs of the region would interfere with witnesses who wished to depose against him. It said:

"He was an elected representative, should he not be removed from office? We have read in the newspapers that he is suspended from the party, should he not be removed from the post? Until then doing anything will be difficult. He shouldn't be exercising any power."

The Bench was informed by Sheikh's counsel that he had not exerted any influence ever since the attacks on the ED officials had occured on the 5th of January, and presently being in the custody of the CBI, he had no way to use his position.

Advocate General for the State informed the Court that while he had been removed from the party, his removal as pradhan of the Zilla Parishad would have to take place in a democratic manner under the law.

ASG Ashoke Chakrbarti agreed with the Court's inquiry and submitted that the position held by Shahjahan was akin to that of a cabinet minister's.

These developments came in a batch of pleas, including a suo moto motion against the unrest in Sandeshkhali.

Advocate Priyanka Tibrewal, appearing in person in one of the matters submitted that she had received information from 80 women from Sandeshkhali, who had visited Calcutta to meet the Prime Minister and wished to bring the information on record in the form of a supplementary affidavit.

Advocate Alakh Srivastava, another petitioner, told the Court that his plea pertained to the transfer of investigation of the criminal cases registered against Shahjahan to the CBI, and that in such a plea, the accused had no right of hearing.

Amicus Curiae Jayanta Narayan Chakraborty submitted that he had information that the land which had been grabbed had been changed in character and that upon being returned to the original owners, there was no way for them to reuse it as agricultural land anymore.

Another counsel mentioned their plea regarding the protection of witnesses, highlighting that given the gravity of the matter, it may be risky for locals to depose against a man of Shahjahan's influence and as such, the Court may implement the witness protection scheme to allow protection of witnesses by either the Legal Services Authorities, SC/ST Commission or the CBI.

Upon hearing all contentions, the Court posted the matter for further hearing on 4th April, 2024, and also discouraged efforts from outsiders including advocates, to visit the area and further aggravate the situation.

 Case: In Re: The Court on Its Own Motion v State of West Bengal