Ram Navami Violence
On July 17, the Supreme Court of India heard the Trinamool Congress-led (TMC) West Bengal government’s plea challenging the Calcutta High Court’s order transferring the probe into the cases concerning the Ram Navami violence to the National Investigation Agency (NIA).
The court’s three-judge bench, comprising Chief Justice DY Chandrachud, Justice PS Narasimha and Justice Manoj Misra, directed the parties to review and verify if the FIRs filed in cases of Ram Navami violence overlap and pertain to the same rally.
The West Bengal government’s counsel, Senior Advocate Abhishek Manu Singhvi, argued that the NIA lacked jurisdiction as the scheduled offences under the NIA Act were not involved in the case. However, the court pointed out that the Explosive Substances Act, 1908, is a scheduled offence under the NIA Act and the Calcutta High Court’s order says that the State Police deliberately omitted to invoke the statute in the FIRs registered.
The West Bengal government’s counsel said that none of the FIRs registered related to the use of explosives to invoke the scheduled act. He further alleged that the High Court passed the impugned order in a “politically motivated petition.” Meanwhile, the West Bengal Police’s counsel, Senior Advocate Gopal Sankaranarayanan, argued that the Calcutta High Court’s order “demoralises the state police force.”
Meanwhile, BJP Leader of Opposition in the West Bengal Assembly Suvendu Adhikari’s counsel, Senior Advocate PS Patwalia, argued that bombs were hurled during religious rallies in the state and the police omitted to mention these incidents in the FIRs. The counsel further submitted that there are news reports of people getting injured due to bomb explosions. He further informed the court that the Government of India issued a notification u/s 6(5) of the Act to suo motu direct the NIA to investigate the cases.
The counsels further clashed on whether the Ram Navami incident should be treated as a unified incident or a split incident. While Patwalia argued in favour of treating the Ram Navami incident as a unified incident, the West Bengal Police’s counsel alleged that they are separate incidents which occurred at different places in different places.
Patwalia argued that treating the Ram Navami violence as split incidents, and thus, dividing it into parts would hinder the investigation. He said, “This is one Ramnavami incident. It’s all one common incident.”
Gopal Sankaranarayanan contested Patwalia’s argument and said, “My friend should bother to read our report. The procession is on the same day but at different places with different people.” He argued that the incidents were separate with multiple FIRs filed, thus, they should be treated as distinct events.
The Chief Justice intervened and instructed the parties to review the FIRs and clarify if the FIRs filed in cases of Ram Navami violence overlap and pertain to the same rally. He said, “Have you done this exercise? There are 6 FIRs. Do they all relate to the same incident? We want you to do that exercise and tell us. You read the FIR and tell us,” while listing the case for the next hearing on July 21.
Calcutta High Court’s observations
On April 27, the Calcutta High Court transferred the probe, and directed the West Bengal Police to hand over all documents including FIRs, case papers, seized materials, footage, etc concerning the violence which occurred during Ram Navami celebrations in the state to the NIA.
“We are convinced that no useful purpose would be served by directing the State Police to register cases against those, who used acid bottles and petrol bombs etc under the Explosive Substances Act as the matter has travelled beyond that stage and it is fit case to transfer the investigation to the NIA,” the Calcutta High Court said.
“…it is evidently clear that despite the offences being committed under the Act mentioned in the schedule to the NIA Act, no case has been registered under the provisions of such Act. It raises a series doubt in our minds as to whether this was a deliberate attempt by the investigating police fighting shy of resorting to the procedure required to be complied with under Section 6(1) of the NIA Act,” the court added.
The Calcutta High Court said that the state police has underplayed the true state of affairs as the police has been directed to transfer the probe to the NIA in more than 8 cases. The Calcutta High Court said, “the state police having been directed by this Court in more than 8 orders to transfer the matter to the NIA, in the present incidents they have under played the true state of affairs which in our view should not be permitted.”
Furthermore, the Calcutta High Court said that it prima-facie found that there was a deliberate attempt of the police to not register offences under Explosive Substances Act. The Calcutta High Court said, “we prima facie find that there has been a deliberate attempt on the part of the concerned police not to register any offence under the provisions of the Explosives Substances Act. There is also mention about the acid bottles and if be so, necessarily offence under the scheduled Act having been committed, the procedure under Section 6(1) of the NIA Act should have been resorted to.”
The Calcutta High Court concluded, “In the result, the writ petitions are disposed of by directing the concerned police to ensure that all the FIRs, documents, materials seized, CCTV footage etc. be immediately handed over to the appropriate authority of the National Investigation Agency who on receipt of all the entire materials shall commence investigation and proceed in accordance with law.” Furthermore, the Calcutta High Court stated that the police shall hand over the materials to the NIA within a period of two weeks from the order’s date.
Leave a Comment