Criminal cases must rely on proof not public perception, declares Calcutta High Court

Kolkata: Observing that criminal proceedings cannot be influenced by public sentiment or social media debate, the Calcutta High Court has directed the state Criminal Investigation Department (CID) to continue its investigation into a series of cross-complaints between two advocates and their client, involving allegations of sexual assault, abduction, extortion and criminal intimidation.

Justice Ananya Bandyopadhyay, delivering a detailed judgment, observed that the matter had its roots in a professional dispute that later escalated into serious criminal allegations. The petitioners—advocates who had represented victims in cases linked to Sandeshkhali—claimed they were physically assaulted and robbed, and that one of them had been subjected to sexual violence in April 2023. They filed a complaint at Chatterjeehat Police Station in Howrah.

The accused, a person they had earlier represented, lodged a counter-complaint in May 2024 alleging abduction, extortion and intimidation. The High Court recorded that both cases involved grave and contradictory allegations which could only be resolved through a full investigation and trial.

In May 2024, the Forensic Science Laboratory submitted its report stating that no semen or gonococcus bacteria were detected in the biological samples examined. Justice Bandyopadhyay clarified that such findings formed part of the case record but were not conclusive by themselves. Their evidentiary value, the court said, must be tested in accordance with law and weighed alongside witness statements and other material collected by investigators.

The court expressed strong disapproval of the petitioners’ repeated non-cooperation with the CID, noting that they failed to appear for questioning and did not produce copies of complaints or general diary entries they claimed to have made. It also declined their plea for personal security, stating that such protection fell within the jurisdiction of the state’s security agencies, not the court.

Dismissing the plea to quash the proceedings, the judge directed the CID to continue its investigation but not to take coercive steps against the petitioners without prior leave.