It Is Shameful If Even One Affidavit Is Proved, West Bengal Claims To Be Safest For Women: Calcutta HC On Affidavits Filed By Sexual Assault Victims In Sandeshkhali

In the eventful hearing, the Court also remarked on the safety of women in the area and said that even if one of the Affidavits submitted by women complainants is proven, then it is highly shameful for the State.

The Division Bench comprising Chief Justice T.S Sivagnanam and Justice Hiranmay Bhattacharyya heard the matter.

Upon hearing submissions made by Advocate Priyanka Tibrewal who has produced affidavits by women victims of sexual violence in Sandeshkhali, Justice Sivagnanam remarked “If one Affidavit is correct, it is shameful. The entire district administration and ruling dispensation must owe a moral responsibility. Even if 1% is true, it is highly shameful… absolutely shameful. And West Bengal boasts of…say it is safest for women? As per National Crime Bureau Record West Bengal stands number one for the safety of women. If one affidavit is proved to be right, this statistic falls, all of this falls and if it falls you cannot resurrect it."

During the hearing, Advocate Tibrewal submitted, “These are the complaints which I have gathered, more than 6000 pages. On three consecutive weekends, I went to Sandeshkhali, not alone with advocates…we went there…it was like something that we are going to distribute for free…so many people came to us for complaints. They have said that nothing has absolutely happened…it has just been said to blame somebody…I am not mentioning the Government.”

She further submitted, “I have not served these complaints to the State. Because these people will be again tortured…there are statements like this “One Shahjahan has been arrested”, he has so many aids, they are roaming on motorcycles. These people came to give complaints and they are telling them that “we will behead you and play football with your heads.”

Afterwards, Tibrewal showed an Affidavit to the Bench, clarifying that she would not share with the State as the identity might be revealed causing danger to the woman.

Exasperated by the events, she said “This lady is a married lady, living in Kolkata, her father’s house is in Sandeshkhali. She was called by the father and said that these people, the one who has been arrested…they have told me that they have taken away my land, they have changed the records.. so she goes to the father’s house…and what happens in the daylight, in the afternoon, eight people, including this person who is arrested, they come to their house they pick her up, they take her to a particular political office of a party, four to five people rape her, then also they do not have mercy, they don’t leave her. They say you are going to be here for entertainment to us for 13 days…they don’t leave her. She is raped every day by four to five people…after that, the husband goes from Calcutta and the father goes, they beg and plead, and then they leave her on the condition of no FIR. This lady gathers courage and goes to the Police Station…and the police say we will not register a complaint against Shahjahan, we will not register a complaint against Uttam Sardar.”

On interference by the Counsel for the prime accused Sheikh Shahjahan, the Court remarked, “You are appearing for an accused who is now under custody or investigation and you have absolutely no right to comment upon any of these things. You first clear your shadow or clear the darkness around yourself and then let your client represent...”

ASG SV Raju appeared for the Enforcement Directorate and requested the Court to direct the State to supply copies of all the FIRs and Chargesheets, the same was objected to by the Advocate General for the State of West Bengal.

The Court, however, directed that this will be examined by the court, it is secondary whether it should be placed before the ED or not and that they will consider the request after perusing and scrutinising the documents.

The High Court took suo moto cognizance in response to the newspaper reports of alleged sexual assault, violence and land-grabbing cases in Sandeshkahli, North 24 Parganas, West Bengal. The Court had clarified that there is no interim order of stay of the arrest of Sheikh in any case before the court and also expressed anguish and concern over the fact that in earlier cases of a similar nature, the Police Authorities took four years to file chargesheets and there was a delay in investigations/inquiries.

The Calcutta High Court had also told the Counsel of the prime accused Sheikh Shahjahan that he shall not exercise his powers as Zila Parishad Pradhan of Sandeshkhali, at least until the next date of hearing.

A Public Interest Litigation(PIL) had also been filed by AOR Alakh Alok Srivastava before Calcutta High Court seeking justice for the victims of the alleged violence in the area, praying for a High Court-monitored CBI/SIT enquiry into the matter, and seeking constitution of Fact-finding committee, compensation for the victims, deployment of Central Reserve Police Force(CRPF) in the affected area.

Cause Title: The Courts On Its Own Motion v. State Of West Bengal, Priyanka Tibrewal v. State Of West Bengal and Ors. and Alakh Alok Srivastava v. State Of West Bengal And Ors. (WPA  4011 of 2024)