The Calcutta High Court on Thursday slammed the Bengal government as it continued hearing petitions on a suo motu motion on alleged sexual assault and land grabbing at Sandeshkhali in North 24-Parganas district and petitions seeking transfer of investigation of these cases to the CBI.
Calling the case “extremely shameful”, the court pulled up the ruling Trinamool Congress-led Government, saying it is their “100% responsibility” if the “safety of a citizen is under threat”.
BJP leader and petitioner-lawyer Priyanka Tibrewal submitted a voluminous compilation before the court which she said contained around 100 affidavits of alleged victims of sexual assault, apart from those of land grabbing and violence.
Tibrewal, who prayed for transfer of investigation to the CBI, placed before the Division Bench, also comprising Justice Hiranmay Bhattacharyya, a number of complaints by alleged victims.
She stated that she had gone to Sandeshkhali on three weekends along with other lawyers and notaries to record the affidavits, Tibrewal claimed that the voluminous files contained around 100 complaints by women alleging sexual assault, apart from several of alleged land grabbing and other instances of violence and destruction of property.
“So many people came. They said nothing happened. I am putting the affidavit on record. I am not mentioning their names or they will be under threat. There was a lady who went to visit her father whose land was grabbed. She was taken in daylight and raped (by people), including (Sheikh) Shahjahan and other workers. This is not just land grabbing but deep issues, including Government land officials. The land records were changed and (they were) asked to file a civil suit. How will these people file a civil suit? If they resist, they are tortured and raped. Even police are involved,” she told the court.
“If at least one per cent (of the allegations) is true, it is highly shameful,” a division bench presided by Chief Justice T S Sivagnanam said.
Opposing the prayers for transfer of investigation, West Bengal’s Advocate-General Kishore Dutta claimed before the Division Bench that Central agencies have lost the trust posed in them.
He questioned the conviction rate of Central agencies in cases they were probing in the State, while the Enforcement Directorate’s counsel accused it of non-cooperation in taking forward investigations.
On the question raised by the AG as to why the alleged victim women did not come up with their complaints earlier, Tibrewal said it happens when general people cannot take atrocities anymore.
Accusing the State of non-cooperation, the Central Government’s Deputy Solicitor-General Dhiraj Trivedi, representing the ED, asked how the Central agencies could take forward the investigations in such a situation.
The Chief Justice also rebuked the lawyer of Sheikh Shahjahan, the Trinamool Congress leader who is the main accused in the Sandeshkhali incidents, who called for an investigation into the allegations.
“You are appearing for an accused who is under investigation. You first clear the shadow around you, then voice your grievance,” Chief Justice TS Sivagnanam said.
He further told the expelled Trinamool leader’s lawyer that if he continues to appear for him, then the “reasonable apprehension is that you have been set up by the person who is behind bars”.
A report of the National Commission for Scheduled Tribes was also filed by another petitioner-advocate Susmita Saha Dutta, who stated that she had visited Sandeshkhali on NCST’s invitation along with its members, before the court.
Advocate Jayanta Narayan Chatterjee, the amicus curiae appointed by the court in the matter, has already filed a report before it on the allegations of sexual atrocities on women and land grabbing of villagers. “Few lands are being returned. They admitted that lands were grabbed, but the way in which lands are being returned is not proper. Land was grabbed by some people, but now the State is returning the land. How is this happening? We also found that several women are being tortured, and the way complaints are being filed in the police is also not proper,” he told the court.
After hearing the submissions of advocates on the various prayers, the Division Bench reserved judgment on the petitions.