Supreme Court Asks West Bengal Govt To Approach HC For Permission To Register FIR Against Suvendu Adhikari In Burdwan Stampede Case

The Supreme Court on Thursday refused to entertain a petition mentioned by the government of West Bengal seeking liberty for the registration of an FIR against the current leader of the Opposition in West Bengal, Suvendu Adhikari, in relation to a stampede at a blanket distribution event in Bengal's West Burdwan district. The State approached the Supreme Court saying that the Calcutta High Court has passed a blanket order barring the registration of FIRs against Adhikari without its prior permission.

The matter was mentioned by Senior Advocate Abhishek Manu Singhvi before a bench comprising Chief Justice DY Chandrachud and Justice PS Narasimha. 

The incident took place yesterday in a blanket distribution event attended by Adhikari where three people were killed in a stampede caused due to overcrowding. The Calcutta High Court had recently stayed over 17 FIRs registered against Adhikari and passed an order restraining the State from registering fresh FIRs against him. The High Court had ordered that the State police would not register any FIRs against Adhikari without the leave of the High Court.

Senior Advocate Singhvi submitted that the High Court judge who passed the blanket stay on lodging FIR against Adhikari was away in Port Blair for judicial work. Due to the same, the state could not seek modification on the order and the State could not investigate the deaths due to its inability to register an FIR against Adhikari. He said–

"We want the liberty to file an FIR. There has been a blanket protection that has been granted by a single judge of High Court. A 14 year old and an old lady died, I can't even register an FIR!"

The bench noted that the State had the option of moving to the Chief Justice of Calcutta High Court to alter the blanket stay. CJI DY Chandrachud stated–

"A direction was issued by a single judge in Calcutta HC. The single judge is not available for judicial work in Calcutta. It is submitted that SLP had to be instituted before this court. Even if the single judge is unavailable, the petitioner has the remedy of moving the Chief Justice of the High Court for directions."

In view of the same, Sr Adv Singhvi sought liberty to withdraw the SLP and move to the High Court for appropriate directions. The same was granted