The Calcutta High Court has declined urgent intervention in a plea by Sumit Roy’s wife alleging a fake encounter threat to make him confess. Noting the State’s stand that he is already in custody and the investigation is on, the Court has sent the matter to the regular bench after the vacation.
Kolkata: Declining to intervene urgently in a petition alleging that the West Bengal Police coerced Sumit Roy, described in the plea as a close aide of Trinamool Congress (TMC) MP Abhishek Banerjee, into confessing that he had stored about ₹1.02 crore that police say they seized at the party’s former office in Diamond Harbour, the Calcutta High Court on Tuesday, November 10 directed that it be listed before the regular bench after the ongoing court vacation [Susmita Ghosh v. State of West Bengal and Ors.].
The petition was filed by Roy’s wife, Susmita Ghosh, and heard by Justice Saugata Bhattacharyya.
What the petition claims
Roy, who is in police custody, was threatened with a fake encounter to make him confess that he had stored crores of rupees at the premises, the petition says. It claims he was recently taken there, where he saw police officials arranging and counting bundles of currency notes, and was then made to wear a black mask and pose before the cash while the Additional Superintendent of Police (Zonal) addressed a press conference announcing the seizure.
It further alleges that criminal proceedings were started against Roy only after the change of government in West Bengal on May 4, as part of a political vendetta aimed at Abhishek Banerjee. The plea seeks a Special Investigation Team of independent police officers, supervised by a retired Calcutta High Court judge, to probe allegations of custodial intimidation, fabrication and planting of evidence, and coercion to obtain confessional statements.
The State’s stand and the order
Recording that Ghosh had come to Court seeking protection for her husband and fearing that he might be falsely implicated, the Bench set down the State’s position as follows:
“State is represented by Mr. Mitra who is the Learned Advocate General who has submitted that husband of the petitioner is already in custody and investigation is going on. In view of the aforesaid, let the matter appear before the regular bench after reopening.”
All of this is allegation made in the petition. The State has said the investigation is ongoing, and its detailed response is yet to come on record. The Court has expressed no view on the merits, and Roy is entitled to the presumption of innocence.
What the order leaves open
Pleas alleging coerced confessions and threats in custody go to the heart of fair investigation and personal liberty, while the State has the duty and the right to investigate a reported cash seizure. By declining urgent orders and sending the matter to the regular bench, the Court has left both the allegations and the State’s investigation to be tested on a full hearing, once the State’s response is on record.
The case also sits against a politically charged backdrop in West Bengal. The petitioner alleges vendetta, while the State maintains that the probe is lawful and continuing. Neither claim has been adjudicated.
Case Title: Susmita Ghosh v. State of West Bengal and Ors.
Bench: Justice Saugata Bhattacharyya, Calcutta High Court
Date of Hearing: November 10, 2026
Appearances: Advocate Biswaroop Bhattacharyya for the petitioner; Advocate General Surojit Nath Mitra for the State
