Calcutta High Court Seeks State’s Response to Suvendu Adhikari’s Plea Alleging Violence Against Hindus and Sikhs

The Calcutta High Court has agreed to hear a plea filed by BJP leader and Leader of the Opposition, Suvendu Adhikari, concerning alleged communal violence against Hindus and Sikhs in Kolkata’s Rajabazar area. This comes amid the State’s denial of any such incident, with claims that the situation is being exaggerated for political purposes.

After reviewing initial arguments, a bench comprising Chief Justice TS Sivagnanam and Justice H Bhattacharya has directed the State to file a detailed report and set the hearing for November 21. The Court also urged the State to ensure peace, especially with the Chhath Puja celebrations approaching, emphasizing that the festival should proceed without disruption.

During the hearing, the petitioners’ counsel highlighted alleged attacks on Durga Puja pandals, temples, and a Krishna temple, along with damage to statues of freedom fighters. He claimed that a mob of about 10,000 people attacked residences and religious sites of the Hindu and Sikh communities on November 1 and 2, further alleging that the State police are attempting to downplay these incidents as mere rumors, attributing the escalation to a parking dispute.

However, Advocate General Kishore Datta refuted these claims, arguing that the incident arose from a personal dispute between two individuals and was not communal in nature. He stated that the conflict involved one person bringing a sword and firearm, but the gathered crowd was from one community, and the clash had no communal basis. Datta added that six FIRs had been filed, resulting in 23 arrests, and suggested that the petition could be politically motivated.

Chief Justice Sivagnanam noted that media coverage on the alleged violence was limited, remarking that attacks on places of worship are serious and should be widely reported. The petitioners’ counsel pointed out that two journalists who reported on the violence were subsequently arrested, which he claimed reflects a pattern of intimidation against journalists by the State.

The Advocate General questioned the motives behind the petition, suggesting it might be aimed at gaining political mileage. Although the Chief Justice had previously advised Adhikari not to overextend himself with litigation, he acknowledged that political figures may pursue such cases for broader public interests, considering Adhikari’s significant role as Leader of the Opposition.