Kolkata: Expressing deep concern over the recurring instances of unrest in Murshidabad, a Division Bench of the Calcutta High Court has termed the situation in the Beldanga area as "worrisome." While hearing a series of Public Interest Litigations (PILs) filed in the wake of recent communal tensions, the Court directed the West Bengal government to move beyond hesitation and effectively utilize the Central Armed Police Forces (CAPF) already stationed in the district to restore normalcy.

The Bench, comprising Chief Justice Sujoy Paul and Justice Parthasarathi Sen, emphasized that the state administration has a constitutional duty to protect the "life, liberty, dignity, and property" of every citizen.

The recent wave of violence in Beldanga reportedly flared up following the death of a 30-year-old migrant worker from Murshidabad, who was allegedly killed in Jharkhand. When his body was brought back to his native village, protests erupted, leading to the blocking of National Highway 12 and railway tracks for several hours.

The situation escalated as reports circulated of another worker being assaulted in Bihar, leading to further clashes, stone-pelting, and damage to public property. Petitioners in the High Court alleged that the violence was not sporadic but a "premeditated campaign" targeting specific communities, a claim that the state government has strongly contested.

During the proceedings, the Court took a stern view of the law-and-order situation. The Chief Justice remarked that the repeated "spurts of violence" in the district indicate a need for more proactive measures rather than just reactive policing.

"In our opinion, the repeated incidents in Murshidabad are worrisome. Effective and immediate measures are required to be taken," the Bench noted in its order.

The Court specifically addressed the issue of the Central Armed Police Forces (CAPF). It was revealed during the hearing that while five companies of the Border Security Force (BSF) were present in the area, they were reportedly utilized for only a few hours during the peak of the tension. The Bench directed the State to ensure that these forces are deployed for 24-hour patrolling and active vigil to prevent any fresh outbreaks of violence.

One of the primary prayers in the PILs, including the one filed by the Leader of the Opposition, Suvendu Adhikari, was for an investigation by the National Investigation Agency (NIA). The petitioners argued that the "pre-planned" nature of the attacks and the targeting of national infrastructure (highways and railways) warrant a central probe.

While the High Court did not directly order an NIA investigation at this stage, it clarified that the "ball is in the Centre's court." The Bench observed that under Section 6(5) of the NIA Act, the Central Government has the independent discretion to order a probe suo motu (on its own motion) if it believes the situation involves scheduled offenses that impact national security or public order on a larger scale.

By leaving this window open, the Court has allowed the Union Ministry of Home Affairs to assess the situation independently and decide if the Beldanga incident meets the criteria for an NIA takeover.

The Court issued several time-bound directions to ensure accountability and the restoration of peace:

Utilization of CAPF: The State must immediately deploy the five companies of central forces already stationed in Murshidabad. The Bench clarified that if the state feels the current strength is insufficient, it is free to requisition additional companies from the Centre.
Affidavit of Status: The West Bengal government has been directed to file a detailed status report in the form of an affidavit within 15 days. This report must outline the specific actions taken to curb the violence, the number of arrests made, and the steps taken to prevent future occurrences.
Responsibility of Local Officials: The Court placed a direct responsibility on the Superintendent of Police (SP) and the District Magistrate (DM) of Murshidabad. They have been ordered to deal with any further possibility of violence with an "iron hand."
Intelligence Inputs: The Bench advised the administration to rely more heavily on intelligence gathering to identify potential flashpoints before they turn violent.

Representing the West Bengal government, Senior Advocate Kalyan Banerjee argued that the situation is currently under control and that markets have reopened. He informed the Court that over 30 individuals have already been arrested and that the police acted swiftly to disperse mobs.

The state also characterized the litigation as a "Political Interest Litigation," suggesting that the incidents were being exaggerated for political gains. However, the Court maintained that when the safety of citizens is at stake, the technical nature of the petition becomes secondary to the protection of human life.

The Calcutta High Court’s intervention underscores a growing judicial intolerance toward recurring communal instability in sensitive border districts. By mandating the use of Central Forces and keeping the possibility of an NIA probe alive, the Court has sent a clear message: the administration must prioritize the rule of law over political friction.

The matter is scheduled for further hearing after the state submits its detailed affidavit in two weeks. For now, the eyes of the judiciary remain fixed on Beldanga, ensuring that the "iron hand" of the law protects the dignity and property of the common man.