Malda incident update: In a strong-worded criticism of the West Bengal administration, the Supreme Court of India on Monday said that the Malda incident could have been avoided had action been taken on time. The Supreme Court also directed the National Investigation Agency (NIA) to take over the probe into the incident in West Bengal’s Malda district, where seven judicial officers deputed for the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls were allegedly held hostage for several hours at a BDO office in Kaliachowk.
The CJI Surya Kant-led Bench also took a stern view of the conduct of senior state officials, including the Chief Secretary and Director General of Police, over their alleged inaction during the incident. “You are so busy that you cannot take the call of the Chief Justice of the High Court?” a bench led by CJI Surya Kant remarked.
The SC said that timely intervention could have prevented the situation from escalating. The Chief Secretary, who appeared virtually, submitted that he was travelling at the relevant time and did not receive any such communication.
Add Zee News as a Preferred Source
However, he expressed regret over the incident. Taking note of the submissions, the apex court refrained from initiating further action against the officials, observing that it expected greater responsibility and promptness in future.
“We hope that the officers have now well understood the sense of responsibility in which they were expected to respond and provide assistance to the Chief Justice of the High Court when judicial officers were made hostages. We do not propose to take any further action against them,” the CJI Kant-led Bench said, while dropping further proceedings against them.
A Bench of Chief Justice of India (CJI) Surya Kant and Justices Joymalya Bagchi and Vipul M. Pancholi, while hearing a suo motu writ petition registered in the wake of the April 1 incident, took note of a preliminary status report submitted in a sealed cover and observed that the allegations against the state police warranted an independent investigation.
Invoking its powers under Article 142 of the Constitution, the apex court directed the NIA to take over investigation of all 12 FIRs registered by the West Bengal Police in connection with the incident, “irrespective of the offences under which these FIRs have been registered”.
“There are serious allegations against the members of the state/local police. In exercise of powers under Article 142, we direct that the investigation of these FIRs be taken over by the NIA,” the CJI Kant-led Bench ordered.
The Supreme Court clarified that the Central agency would be at liberty to register additional FIRs if the investigation revealed a wider conspiracy, involvement of more persons, or commission of additional offences.
The CJI Kant-led Bench also ordered that the NIA shall submit periodical status reports before the apex court, and thereafter file its investigation report before the designated NIA court in Kolkata.
The top court further directed the West Bengal Police to hand over all case diaries, materials and evidence collected so far to the NIA and extend full logistical support to facilitate the probe.
The development comes after the Supreme Court had, on April 2, taken serious exception to the incident, terming it a “brazen attempt” to browbeat the judiciary and a direct challenge to its authority.
Taking note of a communication from the Chief Justice of the Calcutta High Court, the CJI Kant-led Bench had recorded that seven judicial officers, including three women, were confined by a mob at a BDO office in Kaliachowk for over nine hours and released only after midnight, during which even basic necessities such as food and water were allegedly denied.
The apex court had also noted that the officers’ vehicles were attacked with stones and sticks while they were returning, and had expressed anguish over the “complete failure” of the civil and police administration to respond effectively despite being alerted.
It had then directed the Election Commission of India (ECI) to entrust a preliminary inquiry to an independent agency such as the NIA or the CBI.
Acting on the top court’s direction, the ECI subsequently wrote to the NIA seeking an inquiry and submission of a preliminary report directly before the apex court.
During Monday’s hearing, Additional Solicitor General (ASG) S.V. Raju, appearing for the NIA, informed the CJI Kant-led Bench that three FIRs directly pertained to incidents involving judicial officers, while nine others related to blockades and disturbances in surrounding areas.
The Centre’s law officer submitted that a total of 12 FIRs had been registered, 24 accused persons had been identified, and over 400 individuals were under scrutiny, with call detail record (CDR) analysis underway.
ASG Raju further said that the offences initially registered did not fall within the scheduled offences under the NIA Act, but clarified that once the anti-terror agency takes over the investigation, it would be empowered to probe connected offences as well.
Taking note of submissions made on behalf of the state authorities that two alleged “kingpins” had already been arrested, the apex court directed that the accused be handed over to the NIA for custodial interrogation. (With agency inputs)
