Calcutta HC questions Bengal Police’s action over social media post against Trinamool leader Mahua Moitra
Kolkata: single-judge bench of the Calcutta High Court, on Monday, raised questions over the hyperactive action by the Krishnanagar Police in Nadia district of West Bengal against an individual over a social media post involving Trinamool Congress Lok Sabha member from Krishnanagar constituency, Mahua Moitra.
The individual, Rishi Bagri, approached the single-judge bench of Justice Jay Sengupta, and accused the police of registering an FIR in the matter hurriedly and subsequently resorting to hyper actions against him just because the FIR was registered by a Lok Sabha member of the ruling Trinamool Congress in the state.
The matter came up for hearing on Monday.
The petitioner’s counsel told the court that the Krishnanagar Kotwali Police Station registered the FIR on the basis of a complaint filed by email at 3:25 a.m. on February 7.
In the complaint, the petitioner was accused of making a social media post involving Mahua Moitra, which, as per the complaint, was “disrespectful”, “derogatory”, and “sexually suggestive”.
Based on the complaint, the police registered the FIR under various sections of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.
On Monday, the petitioner’s counsel told the court that, as per the rule, if a complaint is filed digitally, the complainant is required to appear physically at the police stations concerned and sign the complaint.
“In this case, even after three days, there was no signature of the complainant on the complaint. Then how was the FIR registered? Further, the police reached the house of the accused in Noida in Uttar Pradesh, the very next day after the complaint was registered, which is a sign of illegal and unusual activity on part of the police,” the petitioner’s counsel said.
Although, the petitioner had not appealed for an anticipatory bail in the matter, he had approached the Calcutta High Court for scrapping of the FIR altogether.
The state government counsel sought more time in the matter to argue his points.
Justice Sengupta fixed February 19 as the next date of hearing in the matter and directed the state police not to initiate any coercive action against the petitioner in the matter.
At the same time, Justice Sengupta raised the question of whether such a hyper action on the part of the state police was because the complaint was from a ruling Trinamool Congress MP.