No stay on arrest of Sheikh Shahjahan: HC

After Abhishek raises issue on Sunday

The Advocate General submitted that 43 FIRs have been registered, earliest of which was registered four years ago

The Calcutta High Court on Monday clarified that there is no stay on the arrest of Sheikh Shahjahan. The Advocate General submitted that 43 FIRs have been registered, earliest of which was registered four years ago.

The Division Bench of Chief Justice TS Sivagnanam and Justice Hiranmay Bhattacharyya were hearing the suo motu writ petition regarding Sandeshkhali on Monday. The advocates submitted that a wrong impression was created as if an interim order on the stay of arrest of Shahjahan was granted. “There is nothing on record on any of the cases pending concerning the incident of Sandeshkhali. Therefore the said person shall be arrested by the concerned police authorities,” Chief Justice observed.

After the High Court’s clarification, Trinamool Congress spokesman Kunal Ghosh on his social media handle stated that TMC’s national general secretary Abhishek Banerjee was correct and that the matter was stuck in legal entanglement. While thanking the High Court for “clearing the mess” he said that Shahjahan will be arrested within seven days. Banerjee, on Sunday, accused the judiciary of guarding Shahjahan Sheikh whose arrest is being demanded by the villagers for alleged atrocities committed against them. The Advocate General (AG) Kishore Datta submitted that as many 43 FIRs had been registered, the earliest of which was registered four years ago and the last such FIR was registered in December 18, 2023. Out of 43 FIRs, 42 cases have resulted in chargesheet. The FIRs were registered under sections of Indian Penal Code (IPC), including section 376 (rape). Further, in seven cases of land grabbing, a chargesheet has been filed. Further, since February 8, 24 cases under various sections have been started. To which, the court stated that the manner of investigation and the provisions under which the chargesheets were laid is unclear. This aspect of the case, the Court stated, will be examined on a later date.

Matter was fixed on March 4. Apart from this, advocate Priyanka Tibrewal submitted that several women who want to lodge complaints are afraid to go to camps set up by the police. The Division Bench stated that the Court will consider whether legal services authorities should be requested to take up such cases.

The amicus curiae was allowed by the Court to furnish a report on the information gathered on various incidents that took place in the area.