VHP Karyakarta Sourish Mukherjee seeks an FIR against CPI(M) leader Bikash Ranjan Bhattacharya over social media remarks linking an alleged attack on his Kolkata residence to Hindutva supporters
KOLKATA: Senior CPI(M) leader and former Rajya Sabha MP Bikash Ranjan Bhattacharya faces a police complaint over his social media posts and media statements following the alleged attack on his Kolkata residence on October 8. Vishva Hindu Parishad (VHP) Karyakarta Sourish Mukherjee has submitted a written complaint at Bolpur Police Station in West Bengal’s Birbhum district, seeking registration of an FIR and an investigation into the remarks.
In a written complaint dated October 9, Mukherjee alleged that Bhattacharya publicly attributed the incident to people described as “Hindutva supporters” and used the term “terrorists” in connection with the alleged attackers before their identities, affiliations and motives had been established through an investigation.
The complainant has requested the police to examine whether the statements could attract provisions of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), 2023, relating to promoting enmity, statements conducing to public mischief, and other specified offences. He has also sought the preservation and examination of relevant electronic evidence, including Facebook posts, a television interview and CCTV footage purportedly connected with the incident.
According to the complaint, Bhattacharya published a Facebook post at approximately 5.52AM on October 8, alleging that people he described as Hindutva supporters had attacked his residence at Purbalok in Mukundapur, Kolkata.
The complainant further stated that Bhattacharya published another post at approximately 6.46 am on the same day, describing the alleged incident as a “very planned attack” and asking, “If they are not terrorists, then who are they?”
Mukherjee contended that the posts were publicly accessible and capable of being shared and circulated widely through social media. He argued that the use of the terms “Hindutva supporters” and “terrorists” in connection with the alleged attack warranted examination, particularly in the absence of publicly disclosed evidence establishing the identity or ideological affiliation of those responsible.
The complaint also refers to an interview Bhattacharya allegedly gave to Bengali news channel ABP Ananda, in which he reportedly spoke about being subjected to abusive or obscene remarks linked to Hindutva during the incident. Mukherjee has requested investigators to examine the complete interview, including its original video and audio recordings, transcript and surrounding context, rather than relying solely on excerpts or descriptions of the statements.
A significant part of the complaint concerns CCTV footage that was reportedly uploaded to Bhattacharya’s Facebook timeline by another individual. According to Mukherjee, the footage appears to show a person using abusive language and throwing a bottle. However, he contended that the material available to him did not, by itself, establish any connection between the person shown and Hindutva, a Hindutva organisation or any identifiable religious or political group.
The complainant has therefore urged the police to obtain and examine the complete, original CCTV recording and verify its source, authenticity, metadata and circumstances of publication. He has also sought an investigation into the evidentiary basis for identifying the alleged perpetrators as Hindutva supporters. The complaint asks investigators to establish whether the persons responsible for the incident had any actual links with a political organisation, religious organisation or other group.
Mukherjee stated that his complaint was not intended to challenge Bhattacharya’s right to report a criminal incident, seek police protection or demand action against those responsible for an attack. He said that if an offence had taken place at Bhattacharya’s residence, the police should investigate it impartially and prosecute those found responsible, irrespective of their political, ideological or religious affiliations.
However, the complainant expressed concern over what he described as the public attribution of criminal and terrorist characteristics to a broader ideological or religious section without established evidence. According to the complaint, such statements, when circulated through social media and amplified by television news platforms, could potentially generate fear, anger, hostility or mistrust among different sections of society.
Mukherjee argued that the public description of alleged attackers as “Hindutva supporters,” coupled with the use of the word “terrorists,” could be interpreted by some people as a general allegation against individuals who identify with Hindutva. He requested the police to assess the exact wording, context, intention and reach of the publications and determine whether they caused, or were likely to cause, communal tension or disturbance of public tranquillity.
The complaint also notes that Bhattacharya is a senior advocate and former Member of Parliament, arguing that statements by public figures can attract considerable attention and influence public perception. It maintains that the matter should therefore be examined objectively, without prejudging either the alleged attack or the statements made afterwards.
The complainant has asked the police to examine the applicability of Sections 196, 197, 299 and 353 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, along with any other provisions that may be relevant in light of the evidence.
Given that the alleged statements were published electronically, Mukherjee has requested the police to preserve the original Facebook posts, their URLs, timestamps, post identification numbers, metadata, screenshots and archived copies.
He has also sought the complete ABP Ananda interview with its journalist, including the original recordings and transcript, as well as the full CCTV footage and details of the person who uploaded it. The complaint additionally requests investigators to examine relevant comments, shares, reposts and other online material to establish the extent of dissemination and assess whether the publications were followed by threats, hostility, communal tension or any disturbance of public tranquillity.
Mukherjee has offered to provide copies of the relevant posts, screenshots, links, recordings and other material in his possession, and has expressed willingness to cooperate with the investigation.
In his prayer to the police, Mukherjee has sought registration of an FIR under Section 173 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, in respect of any cognizable offences disclosed by the complaint. He has also requested the examination of relevant witnesses, including the journalist who conducted the interview and the person who uploaded the CCTV footage.
The complainant has stressed that any investigation into Bhattacharya’s allegations concerning the incident at his residence must continue independently and without prejudice. He has called for action against all persons found responsible for any offence, strictly in accordance with law.
The complaint ultimately seeks a determination of whether the public statements concerning the alleged attack were supported by evidence and whether their publication attracted any criminal provision.
