The Calcutta High Court has declined the State’s request to register an FIR against BJP leader Suvendu Adhikari. The State had sought the court’s permission, alleging that Adhikari deterred a police officer from performing his duty and labeled him a “stooge” of the ruling Trinamool Congress (TMC) party.
Justice Jay Sengupta, presiding over the case, observed,
“What appears from the complaint and the video (of the incident) is that an altercation purportedly ensued between the police and the petitioner (Adhikari) after a protest over an issue.”
Also read- Calcutta HC Asks State About PIL Seeking FIR Against BJP’s Suvendu Adhikari (lawchakra.in)
He further noted that Adhikari was seen having a disagreement with a police officer, allegedly calling him a “stooge of the establishment” and using strong language.
This development follows an order from December of the previous year, where Justice Rajasekhar Mantha directed the West Bengal Police not to register any new FIR against Adhikari without the court’s prior permission. This order was a response to nearly 26 FIRs against Adhikari, which he claimed were lodged within two years of his departure from TMC to join the BJP.
While the court acknowledged that Adhikari’s language towards the officer was inappropriate, it stated,
“It is made clear that even under grave provocation, utterance of slang language in public, is an act done in poor taste and is not expected of a political leader of some stature or, for that matter, any public figure.”
However, the court emphasized that mere use of slang, even in public, wouldn’t constitute a cognizable offense unless it amounts to obscenity or violates a specific law.
The court further clarified that the actions of Adhikari on the said date did not seem to
“amount to assault or use of criminal force to deter a public servant from discharging his duty.”
Thus, Section 353 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) was not applicable. The court also mentioned that interpreting such incidents as offenses under Section 341 or 353 would jeopardize a citizen’s right to protest.
The application for the FIR was based on an incident from August 17, 2023. The court, after evaluating the submissions from both parties, concluded that no prima facie cognizable offense had been established against Adhikari. The court stated,
“It is actually doubtful whether even the non-cognizable cases would be made out on the instant facts, therefore, the prayer for leave to file an FIR is rejected.”
