Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side)
Sk. Safikul Islam And Anr vs The State Of West Bengal And Ors on 2 June, 2020
Author: Debangsu Basak
Bench: Debangsu Basak
02.06.2020 KC(VC 4) W.P. 5395(W) of 2020 Sk. Safikul Islam and Anr.
-versus-
The State of West Bengal and Ors.
(Through Video Conference) Mr. Bikash Ranjan Bhattacharya, Mr. Pintu Karar........................For the petitioners. Mr. Kishore Datta, Mr. Abhratosh Majumdar..................For the State.
Petitioners seek quashing of two first information reports lodged against them.
Learned senior advocate appearing for the petitioners submits that, none of the two first information reports discloses commission of any cognizable offences against the petitioners. He relies on 2019 SCC On Line Cal., 3941 (Sanmay Banerjee -vs- State of West Bengal and Ors.) and submits that, the Court can pass an interim order directing the authorities not to take any coercive measure against the petitioners and/or stay the first information reports.
Learned Advocate General along with Additional Advocate General appears for the State.
It is submitted on behalf of the State that, the petitioners are not accredited journalists. The petitioners are guilty of violating the provisions of Disaster Management Act. Notice under Section 41A of the Criminal Procedure Code was issued in respect one of the complaints and the petitioners did not respond. He relies on 2020 SCC On Line, page 462 (Arnab Ranjan Goswami -vs Union of India and Ors.) and submits that, as journalists the petitioners do not have any higher right of freedom of speech than a normal citizen. 2
Learned senior advocate appearing for the petitioners submits that, the petitioners will cooperate with the investigation. The petitioners will personally attend the relevant police station from which the petitioners received notice under Section 41A of the Criminal Procedure Code on June 8, 2010. He further submits that the petitioners will cooperate with the investigation and attend the concerned police station physically on receipt of any notice under Section 41A of the Criminal Procedure Code in respect of the other police complaint.
In view of the stand taken by the petitioners in cooperating with the investigation, it would be appropriate that the police do not take any coercive measure against the petitioners. It is clarified that in the event the petitioners do not respond to the notice under Section 41A of the Criminal Procedure Code thrice, then the police authorities are at liberty to take appropriate steps in accordance with law against the petitioners.
Let affidavit in opposition be filed within four weeks. Reply thereto, if any, be filed within two weeks thereafter.
The writ petition shall be treated as ready for hearing on completion of the time period stipulated for filing affidavits.
The parties are to act upon web-generated copy of this order.
(DEBANGSU BASAK, J.) 3