The Calcutta High Court in the case Nazia Elahi Khan vs State of West Bengal and Ors observed and has dismissed the PIL moved against West Bengal Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee, who being the private respondent in order to restrain her from using provocative speeches on the occasion of Eid-u-Fitr, next year.
The Division bench comprising of Chief Justice T.S. Sivagnanam and Justice Hiranmay Bhattacharya in the case observed and has remarked that the similar matter came earlier before this court and we did not entertain the same and this is already over. Thus, this court issues an injunction against the private respondent? Who is the petitioner? How did she come to know of the speeches? Through a news paper report? The foundation of the PIL moved is only a newspaper report.
The petitioner in the plea claimed to be the chairperson of the Muslim Women Resistance Committee and the Legal Solicitor firm.
The petitioner in the plea submitted that the private respondent enters religious congregation during Eid-u-Fitr every year since 2011 and her recent provocative speech, which in the case allegedly led to Ram Navami violence cast an apprehension that a similar situation may again take place if the private respondent is not restrained.
It has also been submitted by the petitioner in the plea that the alleged provocative speeches which are made by the private respondent had gone against the letter and spirit of Islam. Therefore, the petitioner seeks to file certain verses from the Holy Quran, through a supplementary affidavit, in order to seek her sustainable arguments.
Accordingly, the court dismissed the PIL.