Beldanga Violence: Let NIA Show Calcutta HC if Anti-Terrorism Law Applies, Says SC

New Delhi: The Supreme Court has asked the National Investigation Agency (NIA) to reconsider if a case it is investigating in West Bengal merits an anti-terrorism probe. On January 26, the Union government directed the NIA to probe violent incidents that occured on January 16 in Beldanga, Murshidabad district. The central agency launched a probe under Section 15 of the Unlawful Activities Prevention Act (UAPA), 1962, describing the violence as economic terrorism.

A bench of the Chief Justice of India Surya Kant and Justice Joymalya Bagchi asked the NIA, via Additional Solicitor General S.V. Raju, whether it was "just and fair" for the NIA to exercise its power the way it had in the case, Live Law reported.

As per the latest reports in the Hindu newspaper, the issue raised by the Supreme Court was two-fold. One, it asked whether the NIA was in a position to ascertain the nature of the incident in Beldanga since the documentation related to the initial violence, prepared by the police in West Bengal, had not been shared with the central agency.

"The case diary and other documents were not placed before you. It is a pre-decisional conclusion arrived at without looking at any material, and you say Section 15 (terrorist act) of the UAPA is applicable?” Justice Joymalya Bagchi asked Raju.

Secondly, in the words of Justice Bagchi at the hearing on Wednesday, “Every emotional outburst cannot be packaged as affecting economic security.” He was referring to the violence of January 16, which occured after a Bengali migrant worker, Alauddin Sheikh, who was allegedly murdered in neighbouring Jharkhand, was brought home for burial.

While the death had triggered violent protests, the West Bengal government had clarified, on January 24, that Sheikh's was a  “death by suicide”. The post-mortem report of the deceased 30-year-old as well as investigation by Murshidabad police ruled out murder or foul play.

The Union Ministry of Home Affairs had stepped in two days later, on January 26, to ask the NIA to probe the incident, in which crowds had blocked roads, disrupted train routes, set tyres afire, among other acts of violence in which 12 persons were injured.

The background to the Union government stepping in was a January 20 order by the Calcutta High Court that left it to the Union government to decide whether to involve the NIA in the investigation. The high court issued this and other directions in response to a petition filed by the leader of the opposition in the West Bengal assembly, Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) leader Suvendhu Adhikari, and other appellants.

The high court also said the state government must ensure citizens' safety – their "life, liberty, properties" – in light of the hours-long disruption and violence. The state government did not object to the commissioning of more central forces in the area, LiveLaw reported earlier. The forces were already present in Murshidabad, the high court was told.

One of the Public Interest Litigations filed in the Beldanga matter with the high court claims the incidents of violence targeted the Hindus, according to another report in Live Law. The state government had pointed out on the same January 20 hearing that there was peace in the area.

The state police had already began a probe into the violence in Beldanga, under various statutes including the West Bengal Maintenance of Public Order Act, the National Highways Act, the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita and the Prevention of Damage to Public Property Act.

It is the West Bengal government that also approached the Supreme Court, with the plea that the incidents at Beldanga did not require a probe under the UAPA. Senior Advocate Kalyan Banerjee argued for the state government that offences under which the UAPA could be invoked – which are listed in the 'schedule' contained within the Act – were not committed in Beldanga.

However, Additional Solicitor General Raju contended that the attacks in Beldanga were targeted and planned in advance, not spontaneous, according to a report in Bar and Bench. He also claimed in the Supreme Court that the state government had not shared with the central agency the documentation related to the case. To this, Justice Baghci said the NIA should approach ("g0 back to" Calcutta High Court to ask for the case papers to be shared.

Justice Bagchi also said that the NIA has to consider whether the violence in Beldanga was an “impromptu expression” of anguish, not intended to cause economic insecurity. He said the high court may also have to re-examine the issue.

Bar and Bench also reported Justice Bagchi telling Raju: "You can say there was no use of explosives and that there was no intention to affect economic security. You can tell High Court that NIA invoked its power incorrectly."

The NIA probe, therefore, has been sent back to the starting line. The Supreme Court has ordered that the agency must file a status report in the high court, in a sealed cover, "after or during its probe" into whether material exists to make out a case under the UAPA.

Only after the Chief Justice of Calcutta High Court has assessed the NIA's findings, the Supreme Court ruled, can its probe continue (or not), with charges under the UAPA.

The Wire is now on WhatsApp. Follow our channel for sharp analysis and opinions on the latest developments.