‘Lady Constable seen smacking on her head’; Calcutta High Court directs SIT probe into alleged custodial torture of student protester by West Bengal police

In the report prepared by the Inspector General of Police it is reflected that the Lady constable was smacking on the head of the petitioner and pushing her. Further the petitioner was found to be out of coverage for 3 hours 52 minutes.

Calcutta High Court

Calcutta High Court: In a petition filed by a student of the Mathematics Department of Midnapore College, (petitioner) seeking intervention regarding the alleged custodial torture and police excesses including directions for registration of FIR and appropriate investigation against the errant police officials, Tirthankar Ghosh, J., directed that the petitioner’s complaints to the National and State Human Rights Commissions be treated as an FIR and forwarded to the Human Rights Court (Sessions Judge, Paschim Midnapore) under the Protection of Human Rights Act, 1993. It was further directed that Special Investigation Team (SIT) to be constituted under the leadership of IGP Muralidhar Sharma to conduct a thorough probe, with full logistical support from the Home Secretary, Government of West Bengal.

The petitioner, participated in a peaceful student strike on 03-03-2025, organized by the Students’ Federation of India (SFI) to protest incidents at Jadavpur University on 01-03-2025. While present at the college premises, she was allegedly attacked by supporters of the Trinamool Congress and/or outsiders unaffiliated with the college, who entered the campus with the intention of harming her. These individuals violently assaulted her, and it was alleged that police officials present not only failed to intervene but also actively participated in the abuse by molesting her, attempting to strangle her, and inflicting injuries.

She was then forcibly taken to the All-Women Police Station, Midnapore, where, under the supervision of Officer-in-Charge Sathi Barik, she was allegedly subjected to continued custodial torture until her release around 2:00 AM on 04-03-2025. She filed complaints with the National and State Human Rights Commissions and submitted medical records from Midnapore Medical College and Hospital, though she alleged that the attending doctor omitted references to police involvement under duress.

The Court observed that pursuant to court direction dated 11-03-2025, a report was submitted by IGP Training, based on CCTV footage and digital materials from the All-Women Police Station which revealed that the petitioner was inside the police station for 17 hours and 20 minutes, of which she was out of CCTV coverage for 3 hours and 52 minutes. A specific incident recorded at 8:57 to 8:58 AM showed Lady Constable Kuheli Saha smacking the petitioner’s head and dragging her by the hair contradicting the police’s innocence claims. The report by the Deputy Superintendent of Police (Administration) was found to be misleading, omitting this crucial footage and facts.

The Court emphasized that custodial torture is a crime against humanity, directly infringing on Article 21. The discrepancies in official reports and corroborative evidence of police misconduct justified court intervention. The Court treated the petitioner’s complaints to the NHRC and SHRC as a formal complaint/FIR to be registered before the Sessions Judge, Paschim Midnapore, designated as the Human Rights Court under Section 30 of the Protection of Human Rights Act, 1993.

The Court directed the formation of a Special Investigation Team (SIT) headed by IGP Muralidhar Sharma, who was authorized to:

  1. Investigate the matter thoroughly.

  2. Seek necessary permissions if non-cognizable offences are found.

  3. Treat the Human Rights Court as the appropriate Magistrate for the purposes of issuing directions under Section 174 of the BNSS.

The Court empowered the Sessions Judge, Paschim Midnapore to act as the Original/Special Court depending on the nature of offences and was instructed to oversee the trial, issue directions, and process the charge-sheet accordingly. The Court directed the Home Secretary, Government of West Bengal to provide full logistical support to the SIT.

[Sucharita Das v. State of WB, WPA 5447 of 2025, decided on 22-04-2025]


Advocates who appeared in this case:

Mr. Samim Ahammed, Mr. Arka Maiti, Mr. Arka Ranjan Bhattacharya, Ms. Ambiya Khatoon, Ms, Gulsanwara Pervin, Ms. Saloni Bhattacharya, Mr. Danishuddin Abbasi Advocates for the Petitioner.

Mr. Kishore Datta, ld. AG, Mr. Swapan Banerjee, ld, AGP, Ms. Sumita Shaw, Mr. Soumen Chatterjee, Mr. Diptendu Narayan Banerjee Advocates for the State-Respondent(s)

Join the discussion

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *