New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Tuesday dismissed a public interest litigation (PLI), demanding a special investigation team (SIT) on violent protests in Murshidabad district of West Bengal, after the Waqf (Amendment) Bill, 2025.
A bench under the leadership of Justice Surya Kant did not find any reason to entertain the petition and suggested the petitioner to go to the High Court.
“We do not see any reason to entertain this petition under Article 32 of the Constitution, as the petitioner has an alternative, influential measure to contact the High Court under Article 226 of the Constitution”, the top-court bench has said in its order.
Show full article
The petition was filed by a Satish Kumar Aggarwal, who flagged off the failure of the state officials in discharging his duties/responsibilities to protect the lives and property of the residents of Murshidabad.
The lawyer, who was present for the petitioner’s counsel, advocate Baran Kumar Sinha, started his presentations informing the court of the state officials to investigate the violence due to the death of the people of the Hindu community.
“Because the police administration of the West Bengal state has failed badly in discharging its duties/responsibility in protecting the lives and property of Hindus. From April 8, 2025 to April 12, 2025, Murder, arson and robbery incident in Marshidabad, West Bengal, which took place till April 12, 2025, said the counsel.
The court, however, firmly suggested the lawyer to contact the Calcutta High Court, stating that the case relates to West Bengal and there is no reason for the apex court to entertain such a petition.
“Tell us who is preventing you from going to the High Court. It is a constitutional court, which has better powers than the Supreme Court under Article 32 (Constitution). The matter is related to only one state. What does this message give to the High Court?” The court said.
The lawyer informed the court about a report issued by the National Human Rights Commission (NHRC) in this regard, alleging that various human rights were violated.
“NHRC report is very disturbing”, the lawyer said.
After considering the submission, the court dismissed the petition, issued a direction to the petitioner to contact the High Court.
“If the petitioner considers any threat to his life and freedom, he can file the petition online. The hearing can also be through video conferencing (VC). We direct the High Court (officers) to expand some special (for the petitioner),” the bench said.
The bench also commented that such petitions are filed before the apex court, only to create a scene.
“These are only to create a scene. All this is being publicized, we all know”, Justice Surya Kant said.
This report is auto-generated by Ani News Service. ThePrint does not have any responsibility for its content.