Calcutta High Court sets ‘office hour' curbs for Mamata's July 21 rally
The single bench of Justice Tirthankar Ghosh directed that processions will be allowed until 8 a.m. and will be given until 9 a.m. to settle down.
Processions will be allowed to resume only after 11 a.m. to prevent traffic congestion in Kolkata's central business district between 9 a.m. and 11 a.m., the court said.
'From 9.00 a.m. to 11.00 a.m., the police authorities would ensure that there is no traffic congestion through the routes which will lead to the High Court at Calcutta or within a fringe of 5 kilometers where the Offices are situated at the Central Kolkata… Commissioner of Police, Kolkata would ensure that deployment of police force be adequately maintained to ensure smooth traffic movement,' the Court's July 18 order reads.
The Trinamool Congress has been hosting a massive Martyrs' Day rally in Central Kolkata on July 21 for the last two decades in remembrance of 13 people killed in a police firing during a protest movement by the West Bengal Youth Congress on 21 July 1993, according to the party's official website.
Justice Tirthankar Ghosh, on Thursday, in a verbal observation, also urged the Trinamool Congress to choose a different venue for the Martyrs' Day rally from next year, such as Shahid Minar, the Brigade Parade Ground, or the Salt Lake Stadium.
The Court was hearing a petition filed by a group of lawyers alleging potential inconvenience to commuters due to the rally, which will be held on a Monday morning this year.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
United News of India
8 hours ago
- United News of India
SC slams Allahabad HC for making film producer pay Rs 25 Lakh before Mediation in cheating FIR, quashes case
New Delhi, Jul 19 (UNI) The Supreme Court has strongly criticised the Allahabad High Court for directing film producer Shailesh Kumar Singh to pay Rs 25 lakh to a complainant as a precondition for referring a cheating FIR dispute to mediation, despite it being a purely civil matter. A Bench comprising Justice JB Pardiwala and Justice R Mahadevan quashed the FIR registered against Singh, co-founder and production head of Karma Media and Entertainment LLP, calling the High Court's approach 'disturbing' and contrary to settled law on quashing criminal proceedings. 'We are quite disturbed by the manner in which the High Court has passed the impugned order. The High Court first directed the appellant to pay Rs 25 lakh to the complainant and thereafter directed him to appear before the Mediation Centre. That's not what is expected of a High Court… What is expected is to look into the allegations in the FIR along with the material on record,' the Bench observed. The FIR, filed on January 9, 2025 at Hariparwat Police Station in Agra, alleged cheating and criminal breach of trust under Sections 60(b), 316(2), and 318(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. The complainant, a promoter of Polaroid Media engaged in financing media projects, accused Singh of cheating in connection with an oral business agreement between their companies. Singh approached the High Court seeking quashing of the FIR, arguing that it was a civil commercial dispute being given a criminal colour. However, the High Court on March 7 directed him to pay Rs 25 lakh to the complainant, appear before the Mediation and Conciliation Centre, and pay Rs 5,000 as mediation fees, while restraining his arrest conditionally. The Supreme Court noted that the High Court failed to examine whether the FIR disclosed any criminal offence and instead turned the proceedings into a recovery mechanism. 'How many times the High Courts are to be reminded that to constitute an offence of cheating, there has to be something more than prima facie on record to indicate that the intention of the accused was to cheat the complainant right from the inception,' the Court said. The Bench emphasised that even if Singh owed money under the oral agreement, it did not amount to cheating unless there was fraudulent intent from the beginning. It held that the FIR was an abuse of the criminal process and quashed it, clarifying that the complainant remained free to pursue recovery proceedings in an appropriate civil forum. 'We fail to understand why the High Court should undertake such exercise. The High Court may either allow the petition saying no offence is disclosed, or reject it if a case is made out. Why should the High Court make an attempt to help the complainant recover the amount due and payable by the accused,' the Court remarked. Advocate Sana Raees Khan appeared for Singh, Advocate Anand Mishra represented the complainant, and Advocate Shaurya Krishna appeared for the State of Uttar Pradesh. UNI SNG RN
Time of India
11 hours ago
- Time of India
‘Take us home': Birbhum women seek Didi's help in vid appeal from B'desh
1 2 Kolkata: In a video message, members of two Birbhum families pushed to Bangladesh by BSF made an appeal to Bengal CM Mamata Banerjee to arrange for their return to India. TOI had earlier reported that six Birbhum residents, including three minors, were nabbed by Delhi cops on June 18 and sent to Bangladesh on June 26. Two habeas corpus petitions were filed in Calcutta High Court. Among the detained were Sweety Bibi and her two minor sons, and Danish Sheikh, his wife Sunali Khatun and their 5-year-old son. "We are not Bangladeshis. We went to Delhi for work but police labelled us Bangladeshis. We showed Aadhaar cards, but Delhi police did not accept them. We are from Birbhum's Paikar, we have our ancestral home there," Sweety and Sunali said in their appeal. The two women and the children stood with folded hands as they spoke. "The police took away our mobile phones and money. They tortured us and sent us here. We have nothing to feed our children, no place to stay. Mamatadidi, please take us back," they said. You Can Also Check: Kolkata AQI | Weather in Kolkata | Bank Holidays in Kolkata | Public Holidays in Kolkata TMC MP and chairman of Bengal migrant workers' welfare board Samirul Islam posted the video on X. Pointing out that PM Narendra Modi had spoken extensively about infiltration during his speech in Durgapur on Friday, Islam said: "Despite being Indian citizens, their only 'crime' was speaking Bengali in BJP-governed Delhi, where they lived for years in search of work. Sunali, eight months pregnant, is now wandering helplessly in Bangladesh — punished for being Bengali in a country where her own govt refuses to protect her. " The MP urged Modi: "It is your duty to stand by them and safeguard their rights."
Time of India
12 hours ago
- Time of India
HC defers departmental inquiry against ASI due to similar criminal case
Raipur: The Chhattisgarh High Court, in a recent order, deferred the departmental inquiry against Assistant Sub-Inspector (ASI) Sobant Singh, who is also facing a criminal trial for an offence under Section 74 of BNS, 2023 (Assault or criminal force to a woman with intent to outrage her modesty). Tired of too many ads? go ad free now Justice Ravindra Kumar Agrawal ruled that the departmental inquiry should be stayed until the examination of common witnesses in the criminal case is completed. This includes the recording of the delinquent officer's statement. Singh approached the High Court challenging the initiation of disciplinary proceedings and a departmental inquiry against him. An FIR was lodged against the petitioner on March 18, 2025, and a chargesheet was subsequently filed in the trial court. The department then issued a chargesheet for departmental inquiry on May 29. The petitioner's counsel, Abhishek Pandey and Swati Kumari, argued that the allegations in both the criminal case and the departmental inquiry were identical, as were the main witnesses. They contended that recording statements in the departmental inquiry before the criminal case would disclose the petitioner's defence, potentially prejudicing his criminal trial. They cited previous orders of the Chhattisgarh High Court. Conversely, Anmol Sharma, Panel Lawyer for the State, opposed the petition, stating that the charges were serious and constituted misconduct under service regulations. He argued that there was no absolute bar to simultaneous proceedings and that the decision depended on the facts of each case, citing the Supreme Court's judgment in Divisional Controller, Karnataka State Road Transport Corporation vs MG Vittal Rao. Tired of too many ads? go ad free now Justice Agrawal, while acknowledging that there is no legal bar to simultaneous proceedings, emphasised the Supreme Court's consistent view that departmental inquiries should be deferred if the facts and evidence are identical to avoid complications. The High Court observed that in the present case, the allegations in both proceedings were the same, and most of the witnesses were common. The court also noted that allowing the examination of common witnesses in the departmental inquiry prior to their examination in the criminal case could adversely affect the petitioner's defence. Referring to other Supreme Court judgments, including Stanzen Toyotetsu India Private Limited vs Girish V & Ors (2014) and State Bank of India & Ors vs Neelam Nag and Others (2016), the court affirmed that while no "straight jacket formula" exists, deferring the departmental inquiry is appropriate when witnesses and evidence are the same. Therefore, the High Court allowed the writ petition, directing the respondent authorities to defer the disciplinary proceedings against Singh until all common witnesses in both cases have been examined before the trial court in the criminal case. The disciplinary proceedings can then proceed.
