SC Dismisses WB Plea, Keeps NIA Probe in Murshidabad Violence
SC Dismisses WB Plea, Keeps NIA Probe in Murshidabad Violence
Supreme Court dismisses West Bengal's plea challenging Calcutta HC order, allowing the NIA to continue its probe into Murshidabad violence.
New Delhi, The Supreme Court on Monday dismissed the West Bengal government's plea against the Calcutta High Court’s order that refused to stay the NIA probe into the January violence in Murshidabad district's Beldanga. The decision keeps the national investigation active as authorities probe possible terrorist acts in connection with the unrest.
A bench comprising Chief Justice Surya Kant and Justice Joymalya Bagchi said the high court had taken a balanced view of the matter. The apex court was hearing the state's challenge to the February 26 order by the high court, which refused to stay the NIA’s probe and had directed the NIA to file a report in a sealed cover before the high court justifying the invocation of a UA provision.
The NIA, handed the probe by the Ministry of Home Affairs on January 28, has invoked section 15 of the UA Act, a provision dealing with terrorist acts and capable of applying when acts threaten unity, integrity, security or sovereignty, or when explosives or lethal weapons are used in terror acts. In disposing of the state’s appeal, the bench noted that the government could approach the high court with its grievances against the NIA probe, and the high court could examine the Centre’s decision to order the investigation. The bench had also directed the NIA to file a report in a sealed cover before the high court, emphasizing that the NIA would need access to case records to prepare the report that the high court had been directed to examine.
The Murshidabad violence case has drawn attention to the use of national agencies in domestic unrest cases, with authorities continuing to assess whether the incidents qualify as terrorist acts under UAPA. This ruling reaffirms the ongoing NIA inquiry while keeping the door open for the state to raise further challenges in the high court.
