Calcutta High Court: A petition was filed by Suvendu Adhikari, the Leader of the Opposition and an elected representative of the Bharatiya Janata Party from Murshidabad (petitioner 2) seeking direction from the concerned authorities to immediately allow the petitioners, along with two other individuals and their security personnel, to visit the areas of Dhuliyan, Suti, and Samsherganj in Murshidabad district, West Bengal. A division bench of Soumen Sen and Raja Basu Chowdhury, JJ., held that the petitioners, along with an MLA, are permitted to visit the aforementioned areas subject to prior intimation of at least 24 hours to the jurisdictional Superintendents of Police and directed the Administration to take all necessary measures to ensure that no breach of peace occurs during the visit and, if required, to deploy additional forces.
The factual backdrop leading to the filing of the writ petition reveals that following certain unspecified incidents in the mentioned areas, the petitioners expressed their intention to visit the victims. Leaders of other political parties had reportedly already visited the affected places and interacted with those impacted. However, despite multiple communications from the petitioner1 to the Superintendent of Police (SP), Jangipur Police District, requesting confirmation of a suitable date and time for such a visit, no response had been received.
The communications made on behalf of Suvendu Adhikari include emails dated 12th, 13th, and 14-04-2025, wherein the SP was urged to coordinate and confirm the logistics of the visit to ensure safety and prevent any law-and-order situation. The SP, however, remained unresponsive, and no explanation was provided before the Court for this silence. Importantly, the petition does not contain a specific allegation that the petitioners were actively prevented from entering the areas. Rather, it is evident that the petitioners, acting responsibly, sought official confirmation from the local police to facilitate a safe and peaceful visit, which was not forthcoming.
Counsel for the petitioners emphasized the unreasonable inaction on the part of the authorities, arguing that such treatment was discriminatory, especially when leaders from other parties had been permitted to enter and interact with the victims. On the other hand, the Advocate General contended that the writ petition was frivolous and ought to be dismissed with exemplary costs. He challenged the status of Adhikari as Leader of the Opposition and submitted that even assuming such status, it conferred no special immunity or entitlement to seek judicial permission for a political visit. According to him, the petitioner required no “blessing of the Court” for this purpose.
Upon a thorough review of the records, the Court observed that the emails substantiated the petitioners’ attempts to coordinate with the SP. The Court took note that there was no assertion of a formal prohibition against the visit, but the absence of a response from the State Administration to the petitioners’ reasonable communications was conspicuous. It was also confirmed that other political leaders had been allowed entry to the same areas, making it unjustifiable to treat the present petitioners differently.
Accordingly, the Court permitted the petitioners, namely Suvendu Adhikari and an elected representative of the Bharatiya Janata Party from Murshidabad, to visit Dhuliyan, Suti, and Samsherganj, subject to a condition of giving at least 24 hours’ prior intimation to the jurisdictional Superintendents of Police. The Administration was directed to take all necessary steps to ensure that no breach of peace occurs during the visit. If needed, additional forces could be deployed to maintain law and order.
However, the petitioners were expressly restrained from holding any processions, public rallies, or making public speeches that could incite unrest or disturb peace. The purpose of their visit was limited to interacting with the victims, and the Court underlined the need to preserve public peace and tranquillity during the visit.
[Suvendu Adhikari v. State of WB, WPA 8694 of 2025, decided on 23-04-2025]
Mr. Billwadal Bhattacharyya, Sr. Adv. Mr. Moyukh Mukherjee, Mr. Anish Kumar Mukherjee, Mr. Pritam Roy, Ms. Sagnika Banerjee, Ms. Megha Datta, Mr. Tamoghna Pramanick, Advocates for the Petitioners.
Mr. Kishore Datta, Ld. Advocate General, Mr. Swapan Banerjee, Ms. Sumita Shaw, Mr. Soumen Chatterjee, Advocates for the State.
