IN THE HON’BLE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

(CIVIL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION)

PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION

WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) NO. OF 2020

(A petition under Article 32 of the Constitution of India praying for a Writ of Mandamus
and writ of prohibition or any other appropriate writs seeking issuance of specific
guidelines and/or directions in respect of violence and destruction of public property
pertaining to the inaction or speeches of Mamta Baneerjee )

AND
IN THE MATTER OF
Arjun singh,
Member of Parliament, Barrackpore constituency
West Bengal
Address:  R/O Holding No. 36, B.L. No. 19/A, Mominpara, Po-PS Jagatdal, Dist 24 Pgs.
(N) Pin-743125 WB ...Petitioner

Versus

1. MAMTA BANERJEE,
CHEIF MINISTER OF STATE OF WEST BENGAL
R/o 30B, Harish Chatterjee Street, Kolkata - 700026
2. Government of West Bengal,
Through Chief Secretary
Nabanna, 13th Floor,
Sarat Chatterjee Road,
Shibpur, Howrah- 711102,
West Bengal.
3. Deputy Inspector General.
Bhabani Bhawan 1st Floor,
Alipore, Kolkata,
West Bengal 700027
4. Director General
' Government Railway Police Headquarters,
  New Secretariat Building,
9th & 2nd Floor, “A” & “B” Block,
1, Kiran Sankar Roy Road,
Kolkata – 700001,

...Respondents
All respondents are contesting respondents WRIT

WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 32 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA FOR

ISSUANCE OF WRIT, ORDER, DIRECTION OR ANY OTHER APPROPRIATE
DIRECTION FOR VIOLENCE INCITED BY THE SPEECHES OF MAMTA
BANERJEE; AND FAILURE ON THE Part of GOVERNMENT OF WEST BENGAL
TO PREVENT THE ACT OF HOOLIGANISM AND VANDALISM AGAINST THE
PUBLIC, PUBLIC PROPERTY AND TO RECOVER THE COST OF DAMAGES TO
PUBLIC PROPERTY.

To,
THE HON’BLE CHIEF JUSTICE OF INDIA AND HIS LORDSHIP’S COMPANION
JUSTICES OF THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

THE HUMBLE PETITION OF THE WRIT

PETITIONER ABOVE NAMED

MOST RESPECTFULLY SHOWETH

1. The present Writ Petition is filed by the Petitioner under Article 32 of the
Constitution of India which is directed FOR VIOLENCE INCITED BY THE
SPEECHES OF MAMTA BANERJEE; AND FAILURE ON THE Part of
GOVERNMENT OF WEST BENGAL TO PREVENT THE ACT OF
HOOLIGANISM AND VANDALISM AGAINST THE PUBLIC, PUBLIC
PROPERTY AND TO RECOVER THE COST OF DAMAGES TO PUBLIC
PROPERTY. It is respectfully submitted that failure or inaction or speeches on the
part of respondents violates the fundamental right to life and liberty under article 21,
right to move freely under article 19. The inaction on the part of the respondents also
violates the article 51(I), article 257(1), article 257(2), article 257(3), article 246 and
article 300 A of Indian Constitution.

2. The petitioner is filing the present writ petition in public interest. The petitioner has
no personal interest in the litigation and the petition is not guided by self-gain or for
gain of any other person / institution / body and that there is no motive other than of
public interest in filing the writ petition. However it is submitted that Arjun Singh is
an member of Bhartiya Janata party.

3. That the petitioner has based the instant writ petition from authentic information and
documents obtained from various governments departments and newspapers reports..

4. That the petition, if allowed, would benefit the citizens of this country generally as
rule of law is essential for democracy and such brazen violation of law by the
respondents can be stopped by the orders of this Hon’ble Court only.

5. That the persons affected by such acts of the State are numerous and are not in a
position to approach the Hon’ble Court hence the petitioner is filing the present PIL
on behalf of such affected persons.

1. ARRAY OF PARTIES
1) The Petitioner is a citizen of India, with assets of about Rs. 80,55,691/ and liabilities
of 11,00,000. The permanent address of the petitioner is  R/O Holding No. 36, B.L.
No. 19/A, Mominpara, Po-PS Jagatdal, Dist 24 Pgs. (N) Pin-743125 West Bengal.
The contact number of the petitioner is +919836319507 and having Permanent
Account Number vide …………. A photocopy of the PAN Card of the Petitioner
PAN No. ……… is annexed herewith and marked as ANNEXURE P-1 (Page No.
)
2) The Petitioner does not have any personal interest or any personal gain or private
motive or any other oblique reason in filing this Writ Petitioner in Public Interest.

3) The Respondent no. 1 is the Government of West Bengal, represented by …., which
is the appropriate ministry dealing with safeguarding the fundamental rights of the
citizens.
4) The respondent no. 2 is the Mamata Banerjee, Chief Minister of West Bengal, R/o
30B, Harish Chatterjee Street, Kolkata - 700026
5) The Petitioner espouses the cause of safeguarding the fundamental rights of the
citizens of West Bengal guaranteed under Article 21 and Article 19 of the
Constitution. The inaction of respondents also violates article 257(1), article 257(2),
article 257(3), article 51(i), article 300 A and article 246 of the Indian Constitution.

6) All the Respondents referred to hereinabove are "State” within the meaning of
Article 12 of the Constitution and hence amenable to writ jurisdiction under Article
32 of the Constitution.

FACTS OF THE CASE

7. The brief facts that give rise to the present Writ Petition are as follows:
1. That the petitioner is a Member of Parliament from barrackpore, a
constituency of West Bengal. He has been raising his voice against
wrongdoings of government or acts which troubles the general public.

2. Government introduced the citizenship amendment bill in the Parliament. On

6th of December 2019, Mamata Bnaerjee organized a rally to oppose the CAB
at Mayo road. She said that she will not support the CAB until it also included
the Muslims. She further stated that “you can pass the bill in lok sabha and
and rajya sabha, but I will never accept it, I will ask all political parties to
oppose it.” She further also stated that “I would prefer death to such a
discriminatory Bill. This movement will be the second war of independence
for our nation. This is a fight to the finish”. All this was stated when there was
not a single evidence against the CAB which proved it was against the public
or discriminatory in nature. This was reported by Times of India on 6th of
December and is annexed as annexure…..
3. She also said a similar things at the Kharagpur rally on 11th December. There
she asked people to oppose CAB at “any cost”. She also called a second war
of independence. A copy of the news report reported by India Today on 9th
December is annexed as Annexure ____
4. The CAB was passed by the both houses of the parliament on 11th December,
2019. She geared up her protest against the CAA on 13th December. She
announced a series of protests. This led to Polarisation of the masses and also
prevents them from gaining information about the said act. All this was stated
in the report of THE HINDU on 13th December. The report was annexed as
Annexure__________
5. All the above statements led to the violence which resulted into the damages
of public property and the situation of law and order arised in the state. The
violence resulted in the Empty buses and trains were set on fire in Howrah and
Murshidabad, and at least three more districts in Bengal were affected on
Saturday by protests against the amended citizenship law. Several buses ---
the count varied from 5 to 10 --- were set on fire in Howrah district alone. The
ticket counter at Sankrail railway station was vandalised and torched.
Murshidabad witnessed several acts of vandalism, with at least three empty
railway coaches set on fire at Krishnapur railway station. Reports of road
blockades came from North 24-Parganas, Birbhum and Malda. A copy of the
news report reported by The Week and Telegraph India on the 15th December
2019 is annexed as Annexure
6. The violence continues till 16th of December. It resulted into the arrest of 354
people. The protestors blocked ast Midnapore, Murshidabad, Malda, Nadia
and North 24 Pargana Districts. The CM also stated, “implement the act over
my dead body” adding that she would not let CAA be implemented in WB
which is ultra-virus as it is a matter in the Union List and the State cannot
 interfere in this. A copy of the news report reported by India today on the 16th
of December 2019 is annexed as Annexure
7. The Hon’ble Supreme Court of india also made a statement on the same. The
Supreme Court noted that violence must stop. But the violence did not stop
there , but it took a more violent turn. Some of the facts to describe the gravity
of the violence is as follows: The National Highway 34, one of the arterial
roads that connect the north and south Bengal, was blocked in Murshidabad.
Several other roads in the district were also blocked. In Howarh district's
Domjur area, the National Highway 6 was blocked as protester set tyers
ablaze and ransacked several vehicles. A copy of the news report reported by
Firstpost on 17th December 2019 is attached as Annexure ____
8. The Print on 17th of December reported that the worst victim of the violence
is railways. protesters have vandalised or set fire to 19 stations and 20 trains,
pelted stones at passing trains, ransacked ticket booking counters and laid
siege to tracks. Some 655 trains have been canceled in the state. Only 17 FIRs
have been lodged in connection with the incidents of arson and rioting at
railway premises. The Mamata Banerjee shrugged off from any responsibility
by calling it a small incident. The report of The PRINT is annexed as
annexure_____
9. The bussiness times took out a brief summary of the fact to highlight the loss
incurred by the railways by these violent protests. They reported that Since
December 13 – the day anti-CAA protests broke out in Bengal - at least 19
stations have been vandalised and 20 trains set ablaze or ransacked. Some of
the major stations that have been affected include Beldanga in Murshidabad,
Malda in North Bengal, Akra along the Sealdah -  Budge Budge line, Uluberia
in Howrah, among others. Protesters also pelted stones at moving trainsand
laid siege to tracks. Nearly 700 trains – passing through or originating in
Bengal.  Malda division is said to have suffered losses to the tune of ₹25
crore; while in the South Eastern Railways’ Kharagpur division, losses are. A
copy of the news report is annexed as Annexure ____
10. On 19th December 2019, she echoed for the referendum after fully knowing
that there is no such provision In the constitution or in this act. A copy of the
news report from ToI on 19th December 2019 is annexed as Annexure ____
11. The Calcutta’s high court on 23rd December asked the Mamata Banerjee to
remove all the state sponsored banners and advertisements against the CAA.
12. Mamtha Banerjee states that CAA will not be implemented in West Bengal.
This action of hers is not in accordance to the Constitution and is ultra-virus as
this is a matter of the Union list and she cannot deny its application. She also
made statements such as “no one will lose citizenship” showing that she has
not in reality understood the act as it does not affect the citizens. She is
therefore spreading misinformation resulting in riots

Here is the list of dates to further elucidated the turn of events:

04.12.2019 Government decides to set bring the CAB to the parliament on 9 th of
December 2019
06.12.2019 West Bengal CM, Mamtha Banerjee, while addressing a rally on Sanhati
Dibas' rally at Mayo Road stated that she would support CAA only if it
gives citizenship to all minorities irrespective or gender. She also made
statements that the government of India is too busy creating mock fights
between India and Pakistan. She also went on to state that 30 people had
committed suicide because of the fear of CAA and NRC.
She further stated that “you can pass the bill in lok sabha and and rajya
sabha, but I will never accept it, I will ask all political parties to oppose
it.”
She further also stated that “I would prefer death to such a
 discriminatory Bill. This movement will be the second war of
independence for our nation. This is a fight to the finish”
A copy of the news report reported by Times of India on 6th December
2019 is annexed as Annexure _____
09.12.2019 The West Bengal CM, in her Kharagpur rally, asked people to
oppose the bill at “any cost”, she stated “We will not allow
anyone to depot any person from the country. There will be no
NRC and no division. There can't be a divide and rule policy;
nothing is bigger than the country.”
She further stated that “There is no need to worry about NRC
and CAB. We will never ever allow it in Bengal. They can't
just throw out a legal citizen of this country or turn him/her a
refugee”
She again went on to call this a second war of Independence.
A copy of the news report reported by India Today on 9 th
December is annexed as Annexure ____
11.12.2019 Citizenship Amendment Bill, 2019 was passed by both the
houses and made an act (Citizenship amendment act, 2019)
13.12.2019 West Bengal CM announces a series of protests against the
CAA. She went on to state that she will not implement CAA
and NRC in West Bengal.
As soon as this was done more people were polarised to
oppose the bill without even knowing it fully. There were anti
CAA advertisements put up therefore not letting people gain
knowledge of the bill to favour one’s own public interest and
therefore inciting violence and rioting.
A copy of the news report reported by The Hindu on the 13 th
December 2019 is annexed as Annexure ____
14.12.2019 Anti CAA protests turn violent in West Bengal
15.12.2019 Empty buses and trains were set on fire in Howrah and
Murshidabad, and at least three more districts in Bengal were
affected on Saturday by protests against the amended
citizenship law. Several buses --- the count varied from 5 to
10 --- were set on fire in Howrah district alone. The ticket
counter at Sankrail railway station was vandalised and
torched.
Murshidabad witnessed several acts of vandalism, with at
least three empty railway coaches set on fire at Krishnapur
railway station.
Reports of road blockades came from North 24-Parganas,
Birbhum and Malda.
A copy of the news report reported by The Week and
Telegraph India on the 15th December 2019 is annexed as
Annexure ____
16.12.2019 Violance over implementation of CAA continues. Around 354
people were arrested. The protestors blocked ast Midnapore,
Murshidabad, Malda, Nadia and North 24 Pargana Districts.
A copy of the news report reported by Times of India on the
16th of December 2019 is annexed as Annexure ____
The CM also stated, “implement the act over my dead body”
adding that she would not let CAA be implemented in WB
which is ultra-virus as it is a matter in the Union List and the
State cannot interfere in this.
A copy of the news report reported by India today on the 16 th
of December 2019 is annexed as Annexure ____
"Just because they happen to be students, it doesn't mean they
can take law and order in their hands, this has to be decided
when things cool down. This is not the frame of mind when
we can decide anything. Let the rioting stop," Chief Justice of
India SA Bobde told the petitioners on December 16.
A copy of the news report reported by IndiaToday on 16th
December 2019 is annexed as Annexure

17.12.2019 Supreme Court made an observation on the protests turning

violent and stated that the violence must stop.
A copy of the news report reported by Buisness standard on
17th December is annexed as Annexure ___

The National Highway 34, one of the arterial roads that

connect the north and south Bengal, was blocked in
Murshidabad. Several other roads in the district were also
blocked. In Howarh district's Domjur area, the National
Highway 6 was blocked as protester set tyers ablaze and
ransacked several vehicles.
A copy of the news report reported by Firstpost on 17 th
December 2019 is attached as Annexure ____

News report by the Print states that Railways is the worst

victim of the protests and gives some data on the loss
The railways have borne the brunt of the anti-Citizenship
(Amendment) Act protests in West Bengal. Since 13
December, protesters have vandalised or set fire to 19 stations
and 20 trains, pelted stones at passing trains, ransacked ticket
booking counters and laid siege to tracks. Some 655 trains
have been canceled in the state.
only 17 FIRs have been lodged in connection with the
incidents of arson and rioting at railway premises
West Bengal Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee dismissed such
violence involving government property as “small incidents”,
and shrugged off any responsibility to protect railway
 property.
A copy of the news report is annexed as Annexure ____
Railways worst-hit in Bengal’s anti-CAA protests, but
Mamata calls them ‘small incidents’
Railways have cancelled over 650 trains, and property worth
crores has been damaged in anti-citizenship law protests. But
only 17 FIRs have been registered.
A copy of the news report reported by The Print on 17th
December 2019 is annexed as Annexure______

18.12.2019 Buisness line article sets out some data on the effect of the
protest on the Railways
Railway stations have borne the biggest brunt of anti-CAA
protests. to the tune of ₹16 crore.Since December 13 – the day
anti-CAA protests broke out in Bengal - at least 19 stations
have been vandalised and 20 trains set ablaze or ransacked.
Some of the major stations that have been affected include
Beldanga in Murshidabad, Malda in North Bengal, Akra along
the Sealdah -  Budge Budge line, Uluberia in Howrah, among
others.
Protesters also pelted stones at moving trainsand laid siege to
tracks. Nearly 700 trains – passing through or originating in
Bengal.  Malda division is said to have suffered losses to the tune
of ₹25 crore; while in the South Eastern Railways’ Kharagpur division,
losses are
A copy of the news report is annexed as Annexure ____

19.12.2019 Mamtha Banerjee calls for a UN referendum to decide upon

the CAA issue. There is no provision in the Constitution of
India that permits an international intergovernmental body to
preside into local issues.
A copy of the news report from ToI on 19 th December 2019 is
annexed as Annexure ____

Suddenly after 73 years of Independence we have to prove

that we are Indian citizens. Where was the BJP's head and tail
at that time. BJP is divree-bench of the Supreme Court
ruled, "Persons who have initiated, promoted, instigated or
any way caused to occur any act of violence against cultural
programmes or which results in loss of life or damage to
public or private property either directly or indirectly, shall be
made liable to compensate the victims of such violence."
A copy of the news report reported by IndiaToday on 16th
December 2019 is annexed as Annexureiding the country.
Don't stop your protest because we have to get CAA
 revoked," Mamata Banerjee said.
A copy of the news report reported by The Economics Times
on 19th December 2019 is annexed as Annexure_____
20.12.2020 West Bengal Governor Jagdeep Dhankhar disagreed with
Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee's demand for a UN-
monitored referendum on Citizenship (Amendment) Act
besides the proposed nationwide NRC and said such
assertions are bound to send wrong signals.
A copy of the news report reported by IndiaToday on 20th
December 2019 is annexed as Annexure______
23.12.2019 The Calcutta HC asked the WB govt to remove all the state
sponsored banners and advertisements against the CAA, as
they were resulting in a the riots which were disrupting public
order and property of the government and various people.
27.12.2019 Mamtha Banerjee states that CAA will not be implemented in
West Bengal. This action of hers is not in accordance to the
Constitution and is ultra-virus as this is a matter of the Union
list and she cannot deny its application. She also made
statements such as “no one will lose citizenship” showing that
she has not in reality understood the act as it does not affect
the citizens. She is therefore spreading misinformation
resulting in riots

08.01.2020 The CM asked the people not to bother answering

“unnecessary queries” in the name of any survey. “Some
people may come to your doorstep and ask for your birth
certificate. They may ask you where and when your parents
were born. Don’t respond,” she said.
A copy of the news report reported by The times of India on
08st January 2020 is annexed as Annexure____

CM Mamata Banerjee on Tuesday trashed the concept of

applying for citizenship online under CAA without any
Physical verification.
“There will be no CAA,NRC OR NPR in Bengal. Some
people are trying to mislead you. They say CAA has the
option of online applications but,even if you apply online,your
physical existence has to be verified on the ground,” she told a
gathering in South 24- Paraganas.
A copy of the news report by The times of India on 08st
January 2020 is annexed as Annexure_____
09.01.2020 The live law reported that “Will hear the CAA petition once
violence stops says CJI Bobde”
A copy of the news report by Live Law on 9th of
 january,2020 is annexed as Annexure______

GROUNDS

1. ARTICLE 246: Because in the instant case the Chief Minister of West Bengal had
been vehemently opposing the introduction of the CAA since the act was in its bill
stage and was to be brought to the parliament. The Chief minister had in various
rallies stated that she will not let this act take effect in her state. She also went ahead
to make statements such as “the act will be implemented over my dead body”.
ARTICLE 246 clearly specifies that union has the exclusive power to made the law
on the union list. Citizenship falls under the union list, state has no option but to
follow the instruction of the union. This statement is ultra vires of the constitution as
it clearly deny to implement the law made by the union. In Hindustan Lever v.
State Of Maharashtra1, the court held that if any matter is within the exclusive
competence of the union, it becomes the prohibited field for the state legislatures.
But the above acts and statements of Mamata Banerjee clearly violates this principle
espoused by the court.
2. Basic structure of the constitution. Because the speeches of the Mamata Banerjee
threatens to violate the federalism which held to be the basic structure in numerous
cases. This fundamental document of governance also contains principle of
federalism wherein the Union is assigned certain powers and likewise powers of the
State are also prescribed. In this context, the Union Legislature i.e. Parliament, as
well as the State Legislatures are given specific areas in respect of which they have
power to legislate. That is so stipulated in Schedule VII to the Constitution wherein
List I enumerates the subjects over which Parliament has the dominion, List II spells
out those areas where the State Legislatures have the power to make laws while List
III is the Concurrent List which is accessible both to the Union as well as the State
Governments. In SR Bommai v. Union of India 2, the court held that federalism is
the basic structure of India. In Kesavananda Bharati Sripadagalvaru and Ors. v.
State of Kerala and Anr.3, the court sets out some principles to be basic structure.
The federalism is one of those principles. In Jindal Stainless Steel v. State Of
Haryana4, the court held that An approach which tends to dilute the federal character
of our Constitutional scheme must, therefore, be avoided and one that supports and
promotes the concept of federalism preferred by the courts while interpreting the
provisions of the Constitution. If we see the violence that erupted in bengal due to
the speeches of Mamata Banerjee, it’s infringes the federalism vis a vis basic
structure of constitution.
1
(2004)9SCC438

2
1994 SCC (3)
3
 (1973) 4 SCC 225)
4
2006 7 SCC 241
3. Article 19. because the vandalism caused by the goons on the pretext of Mamta
Banerjee Speeches infringes the fundamental right of the movement of people
enshrined in Article 19 of the constitution. In Ramlila Maidan incident Re5, The
court held that security of the state, law and order and public order are not expression
of common meaning and connotation. To maintain and preserve public peace, public
safety and public order is unequivocal duty of the state and its organs. To ensure
social security to the citizen of India is not merely a legal duty pf the state but a
constitutional mandate also. There can be no social order proper state governance
without the state performing the function and duty in all spheres. In our case,
Mamata not only gave fiery speeches but also sat idle when violence erupted. She
has violated her constitutional duty by inciting the violence and jeopardizes the
security of the state. This type of politics must be abstained from, just for few petty
political gains no one should be allowed to threaten the security of the state and
public. In her speeches at Kharagpur rally, she launched a series of protests. She used
words like second war of independence and stop it “at any cost”. Even a person with
basic common sense would relate the war with violence. “at any cost” can easily
lead to violence in any state. If this would not be stopped, it could spread like a wild
fire. Also court in Kedar Nath Singh v. State of Bihar6 held that while it would be
legitimate for the state to punish utterances which incite violence or have a tendency
to create public disorder, it cannot suppress even a very strong criticism of the
measures of the government or act of public officials which has no such tendency.
Mamata Banerjee speeches would incite the violence. She is the Chief Minister of
West Bengal and has a lot of followers. When she says that she would rather choose
to die than implenting NRC is definetely going to impact her followers. Court also
held in State Of Karnataka v. Dr. Praveen Bhai Togadia7 that no person, however
big position he may assume or claim to be, should be allowed, irrespective of the
position, he may assume or claim to be hold in a public life, to either act in a manner
or in speeches which would destroy secularism recognized by the constitution of
India. On her first day, she said that she will only accept the CAB only when it
includes muslims in the act. She tried to gave it a communal angle which resulted
into violence. She knows full well that the bill is specifically for persecuted
minorities and Muslims cannot be persecuted in the Islamic countries. Again
Supreme court in landmark judgment of Shriya Singhal v. Union of India8 held that
there are three concept which are fundamental in understanding the range of freedom
of expression and speech: discussion, advocacy and incitement. Mere discussion or
advocacy of a particular cause howsoever unpopular is the heart of article 19 (1)(a).
it is only when such discussion and advocacy reaches the level the incitement that
19(2) kicks in. It is at this stage that a law curtail the speech and expression that
leaves inexorably to or tends to cause public disorder or affect the sovereignity and
integrity of India, the security of the state, friendly relations with the foreign states.
The speeches of the Mamta Banerjee clearly threatens the unity and integrity of the
India. She knows it very well that centre has exclusive power to make the law. But
she refuses to implement it and asked for UN supervised referendum.
4. ARTICLE 21. Because the violence that followed the Mamta’s speeches violates the
people’s right to life and liberty. Whenever the violence occurred, the people
residing in that particular affected area bear its burnt. Their life comes in danger and
also their security.
5. Over the speeches it was clear that the Chief Minster was not clear with the contents
of the act herself, was misinformed and was in turn spreading misinformation. Her
5
(2012)5 SCC 1 PARA(239)

6
AIR 1962 SC 955

7
(2004) 4 SCC 684 PARA(7,9 and 6)

8
(2015)5SCC 1 PARA (13)
 statements “why should I be asked to prove my citizenship when I have been living
in India for so many years” show that she has not understood the essence that this act
was merely for the illegal immigrants and not for the citizens of the country. Owing
to such misinformation the Chief Minister called for a series of protests against the
act and also put up government sponsored advertisements and banners prohibiting
the act. This goes against her constitutional obligation as the Chief Minister of the
state. These acts of her have resulted in the massive riots that brought the entire state
to a halt for a few days and caused a lot of damage to public property. The massive
rallies that the Chief Minister conducted kept spreading miss information of the act
and inciting feelings of decent and hatred for the act amongst the people and the call
for protests insured that these feelings were publically displayed and those feelings
and frustrations resulted in the riots. The CM also approving government sponsored
banners against the act is completely in violation of the Constitutional obligation and
morality and in violation of the basic structure of the Constitution. In the instant case
the Chief minster through her rallies has herself incited abetted a lot of the violence
by calling for protest and spreading misinformation and fuelling anger amongst the
people. This is against the constitutional obligation of the Chief Minister.
6. Article 256. Article 256 imposes the duty on the state to act in compliance with the
laws of the union. But in this case, state not only has acted prejudicial to the union
law but also has induced others to act against the same. Mamata Banerjee on the 6 th
December called it the second war of independence. On the 11 th December at
Kharagpur rally, she said to stop the law at any cost. On 13 th December, she
announced the series of events. All this is clearly inciting the people to protest
against the CAA. This is in clearly violation of the article 256 of the Indian
constitution.
7. Article 257(1). This article mandates the state government to not impede any union
law from execution. The anti CAA statement of the Mamata Banerjee impeded the
union law from implementation. She put up the banners and advertisements against
the CAA. The work of the Chief Minister of state is to assist and aid the union in
execution of the law, but when Chief Minister herself indulged in opposing the act, it
will definitely fettered the implementation of the act. This led to the opposition of
CAA on no grounds and hence, violation of article 257(1)
8. 4 Article 257(3). This section clearly says that state must provide the protection to
the railways within the state. In this case, this provisions is clearly violated. Some
facts to highlight the same are as follows: 20 trains were burnt, 19 station were set on
fire and more than 600 train were canceled. The state acted but just to showcase.
Only 17 FIR were filed in this regard and Mamata called it a small incident. What
else can be needed to violate the Article 257(3) of the constitution.
9. Article 300. This article guaranteed the individual of protection of his property. The
protesters on 16th December ransacked various vehicle and set them on fire. The
vehicle was not the state property but it is a individual property. State is duty bound
to protect the property of individual but in our case, state sponsored the violence by
the speeches of Mamata Banerjee.
10. Article 51 A. This article imposes a duty on a citizen to abjure violence. Mamata
Banerjee is also the person under this article. Her speeches on 6 December, 9
December and 16 th December outline the same. On 6 th December, she said that she
would prefer death over this act. On 9 th December at Kharagpur, she called to stop it
at any cost and also called it second war of independence. The words like war, death
or phrases like ‘ at any cost’ can easily incite violence.
11. That the government in West Bengal has failed to fulfil its obligation to set
preventive measures as set in the case of Prasavi Bhalai Sanghatan vs UoI (2004) 11
S.C.C 477. The case set a few guidelines that have to be followed in situations
which might lead to riots and lynching. It also stated that those individuals who make
provocative statements and spread fake news are to be prosecuted. In the instant case
the Chief Minister herself was involved in such activities. “40.1. The State
 Governments shall designate, a senior police officer, not below the rank of
Superintendent of Police, as Nodal Officer in each district. Such Nodal Officer shall
be assisted by one of the DSP rank officers in the district for taking measures to
prevent incidents of mob violence and lynching. They shall constitute a special task
force so as to procure intelligence reports about the people who are likely to commit
such crimes or who are involved in spreading hate speeches, provocative statements
and fake news
12. 40.2. The State Governments shall forthwith identify districts, sub-divisions and/or
villages where instances of lynching and mob violence have been reported in the
recent past, say, in the last five years. The process of identification should be done
within a period of three weeks from the date of this judgment, as such time period is
sufficient to get the task done in today's fast world of data collection.
13. 40.3. The Secretary, Home Department of the States concerned shall issue
directives/advisories to the Nodal Officers of the districts concerned for ensuring
that the officers in-charge of the police stations of the identified areas are extra
cautious if any instance of mob violence within their jurisdiction comes to their
notice.
14. 40.4. The Nodal Officer, so designated, shall hold regular meetings (at least once a
month) with the local intelligence units in the district along with all Station House
Officers of the district so as to identify the existence of the tendencies of vigilantism,
mob violence or lynching in the district and take steps to prohibit instances of
dissemination of offensive material through different social media platforms or any
other means for inciting such tendencies. The Nodal Officer shall also make efforts
to eradicate hostile environment against any community or caste which is targeted in
such incidents.
15. 40.5. The Director General of Police/the Secretary, Home Department of the States
concerned shall take regular review meetings (at least once a quarter) with all the
Nodal Officers and State Police Intelligence heads. The Nodal Officers shall bring to
the notice of the DGP any inter-district coordination issues for devising a strategy to
tackle lynching and mob violence related issues at the State level.
16. 40.6. It shall be the duty of every police officer to cause a mob to disperse, by
exercising his power under Section 129 CrPC, which, in his opinion, has a tendency
to cause violence or wreak the havoc of lynching in the disguise of vigilantism or
otherwise.
17. 40.7. The Home Department of the Government of India must take initiative and
work in coordination with the State Governments for sensitising the law-enforcement
agencies and by involving all the stakeholders to identify the measures for
prevention of mob violence and lynching against any caste or community and to
implement the constitutional goal of social justice and the Rule of Law.”
18. That in the case of Tahseen. S. Poonawala vs Union of India (2018) 9 S.C.C 501, the
same was reinstated. In that case remedial measures that had to be followed were
also given, which included immediate registration of FIR and also framing of a
victim compensation scheme. In the case when the trains were vandalised and
stations were badly hit by riots causing a lot of loss of property to the railways and
causing the delay and cancellation of a lot of trains causing a lot of disturbance to
public order, the Chief minster merely shrugged off these incidents as minor
incidents and did not seem to take them too seriously. Some data collected on the
losses for the railways shows that since December 13, 2019, at least 19 stations have
been vandalised and 20 trains set ablaze or ransacked. Some of the major stations
that have been affected include Beldanga in Murshidabad, Malda in North Bengal,
Akra along the Sealdah -  Budge Budge line, Uluberia in Howrah, among others.
Protesters also pelted stones at moving trainsand laid siege to tracks. Nearly 700
trains which were passing through or originating in Bengal.  Malda division is said to
have suffered losses to the tune of ₹25 crore; while in the South Eastern Railways’
Kharagpur division, losses are to the tune of ₹16 crore.
19. “40.13. Despite the preventive measures taken by the State Police, if it comes to the
notice of the local police that an incident of lynching or mob violence has taken
place, the jurisdictional police station shall immediately cause to lodge an FIR,
without any undue delay, under the relevant provisions of IPC and/or other
provisions of law.
20. 40.14. It shall be the duty of the Station House Officer, in whose police station such
FIR is registered, to forthwith intimate the Nodal Officer in the district who shall, in
turn, ensure that there is no further harassment of the family members of the
victim(s).
21. 40.15. Investigation in such offences shall be personally monitored by the Nodal
Officer who shall be duty-bound to ensure that the investigation is carried out
effectively and the charge-sheet in such cases is filed within the statutory period
from the date of registration of the FIR or arrest of the accused, as the case may be.
22. 40.15. Investigation in such offences shall be personally monitored by the Nodal
Officer who shall be duty-bound to ensure that the investigation is carried out
effectively and the charge-sheet in such cases is filed within the statutory period
from the date of registration of the FIR or arrest of the accused, as the case may be.
23. 40.16. The State Governments shall prepare a lynching/mob violence victim
compensation scheme in the light of the provisions of Section 357-A CrPC within
one month from the date of this judgment. In the said scheme for computation of
compensation, the State Governments shall give due regard to the nature of bodily
injury, psychological injury and loss of earnings including loss of opportunities of
employment and education and expenses incurred on account of legal and medical
24. expenses. The said compensation scheme must also have a provision for interim
relief to be paid to the victim(s) or to the next of kin of the deceased within a period
of thirty days of the incident of mob violence/lynching.
25. 40.17. The cases of lynching and mob violence shall be specifically tried by
designated court/Fast Track Courts earmarked for that purpose in each district. Such
courts shall hold trial of the case on a day-to-day basis. The trial shall preferably be
concluded within six months from the date of taking cognizance. We may hasten to
add that this direction shall apply to even pending cases. The District Judge shall
assign those cases as far as possible to one jurisdictional court so as to ensure
expeditious disposal thereof. It shall be the duty of the State Governments and the
Nodal Officers in particular to see that the prosecuting agency strictly carries out its
role in appropriate furtherance of the trial.
26. 40.18. To set a stern example in cases of mob violence and lynching, upon
conviction of the accused person(s), the trial court must ordinarily award maximum
sentence as provided for various offences under the provisions of the IPC.
27. 40.19. The courts trying the cases of mob violence and lynching may, on application
by a witness or by the Public Prosecutor in relation to such witness or on its own
motion, take such measures, as it deems fit, for protection and for concealing the
identity and address of the witness.
28. 40.20. The victim(s) or the next of kin of the deceased in cases of mob violence and
lynching shall be given timely notice of any court proceedings and he/she shall be
entitled to be heard at the trial in respect of applications such as bail, discharge,
release and parole filed by the accused persons. They shall also have the right to file
written submissions on conviction, acquittal or sentencing.
29. 40.21. The victim(s) or the next of kin of the deceased in cases of mob violence and
lynching shall receive free legal aid if he or she so chooses and engage any advocate
of his/her choice from amongst those enrolled in the legal aid panel under the Legal
Services Authorities Act, 1987.”
30. That the same case also stated that, “We may emphatically note that it is axiomatic
that it is the duty of the State to ensure that the machinery of law and order functions
efficiently and effectively in maintaining peace so as to preserve our quintessentially
secular ethos and pluralistic social fabric in a democratic set-up governed by rule of
 law. In times of chaos and anarchy, the State has to act positively and responsibly to
safeguard and secure the constitutional promises to its citizens. The horrendous acts
of mobocracy cannot be permitted to inundate the law of the land. Earnest action and
concrete steps have to be taken to protect the citizens from the recurrent pattern of
violence which cannot be allowed to become “the new normal”. The State cannot
turn a deaf ear to the growing rumblings of its People, since its concern, to quote
Woodrow Wilson, “must ring with the voices of the people”. The exigencies of the
situation require us to sound a clarion call for earnest action to strengthen our
inclusive and all-embracing social order which would, in turn, reaffirm the
constitutional faith. We expect nothing more and nothing less”.
31. Thereby showing that it was they duty of the state to prevent the mass rioting and
violence but in turn in the instant case it has been the government that has been
fuelling the protest by spreading misinformation and ads and also asking people to
engage in protests thereby going against their Constitutional obligation and against
basic structure by endangering the people’s lives. In the instant case all the above
mentioned measures have not been taken and hence the Chief Minister has failed in
her obligations to protect the state and its subjects. There is a necessity to
compensate the losses incurred.
32. That in the Nariman Committee report it was recorded that compensating the losses
caused by the riots is necessary and the government should look to make those
compensations. This committee report has been upheld in multiple cases such as that
of Destruction of Public &Private Properties, In Re, (2007) 4 SCC 474, Destruction
of Public & Private Properties v. State of A.P., (2009) 5 SCC 212, Kodungallur Film
Society v. Union of India, (2018) 10 SCC 713. All these cases uphold the Nariman
committee report and also lay down certain guidelines to asses compensations.
33. “4. Two reports have been submitted by the Committees. The matter was heard at
length. The recommendations of the Committees headed by Justice K.T. Thomas and
Mr F.S. Nariman have been considered. Certain suggested guidelines have also been
submitted by the learned Amicus Curiae.
34. 5. The Report submitted by Justice K.T. Thomas Committee has made the
following recommendations:
35. (i) The PDPP Act must be so amended as to incorporate a rebuttable presumption
(after the prosecution established the two facets) that the accused is guilty of the
offence.
36. (ii) The PDPP Act to contain provision to make the leaders of the organisation,
which calls the direct action, guilty of abetment of the offence.
37. (iii) The PDPP Act to contain a provision for rebuttable presumption.
38. (iv) Enable the police officers to arrange videography of the activities damaging
public property.
39. 6. The recommendations of the Justice Thomas Committee have been made on
the basis of the following conclusions after taking into consideration the
materials.
40. In respect of (i)
41. 7. ‘According to this Committee the prosecution should be required to prove, first
that public property has been damaged in a direct action called by an organisation
and that the accused also participated in such direct action. From that stage the
burden can be shifted to the accused to prove his innocence. Hence, we are of the
view that in situations where prosecution succeeds in proving that public property
has been damaged in direct actions in which the accused also participated, the court
should be given the power to draw a presumption that the accused is guilty of
destroying public property and that it is open to the accused to rebut such
presumption. The PDPP Act may be amended to contain provisions to that effect.’
42. In respect of (ii)
43. 8. ‘Next we considered how far the leaders of the organisations can also be caught
and brought to trial, when public property is damaged in the direct actions called at
 the behest of such organisations. Destruction of public property has become so
rampant during such direct actions called by organisations. In almost all such cases
the top leaders of such organisations who really instigate such direct actions will
keep themselves in the background and only the ordinary or common members or
grass root-level followers of the organisation would directly participate in such direct
actions and they alone would be vulnerable to prosecution proceedings. In many
such cases, the leaders would really be the main offenders being the abettors of the
crime. If they are not caught in the dragnet and allowed to be immune from
prosecution proceedings, such direct actions would continue unabated, if not further
escalated, and will remain a constant or recurring affair.
44. Of course, it is normally difficult to prove abetment of the offence with the help of
direct evidence. This flaw can be remedied to a great extent by making an additional
provision in the PDPP Act to the effect that specified categories of leaders of the
organisation which make the call for direct actions resulting in damage to public
property, shall be deemed to be guilty of abetment of the offence. At the same time,
no innocent person, in spite of his being a leader of the organisation shall be made to
suffer for the actions done by others. This requires the inclusion of a safeguard to
protect such innocent leaders.’
45. In respect of (iii)
46. 9. ‘After considering various aspects to this question, we decided to recommend that
prosecutions should be required to prove (i) that those accused were the leaders or
office-bearers of the organisation which called out for the direct actions, and (ii) that
public property has been damaged in or during or in the aftermath of such direct
actions. At that stage of trial it should be open to the court to draw a presumption
against such persons who are arraigned in the case that they have abetted the
commission of offence. However, the accused in such case shall not be liable to
conviction if he proves that (i) he was in no way connected with the action called by
his political party, or that (ii) he has taken all reasonable measures to prevent causing
damage to public property in the direct action called by his organisation.’
47. In respect of (iv)
48. 10. ‘The Committee considered other means of adducing evidence for averting
unmerited acquittals in trials involving offences under the PDPP Act. We felt that
one of the areas to be tapped is evidence through videography in addition to
contemporaneous material that may be available through the media, such as
electronic media. With the amendments brought in the Evidence Act, through Act 21
of 2000 permitting evidence collected through electronic devices as admissible in
evidence, we wish to recommend the following:
49. (i) If the officer in charge of a police station or other law-enforcing agency is of
opinion that any direct action, either declared or undeclared, has the potential of
causing destruction or damage to public property, he shall avail himself of the
services of video operators. For this purpose each police station shall be empowered
to maintain a panel of local video operators who could be made available at short
notices.
50. (ii) The police officer who has the responsibility to act on the information that a
direct action is imminent and if he has reason to apprehend that such direct action
has the potential of causing destruction of public property, he shall immediately avail
himself of the services of the videographer to accompany him or any other police
officer deputed by him to the site or any other place wherefrom video shooting can
conveniently be arranged concentrating on the person/persons indulging in any acts
of violence or other acts causing destruction or damage to any property.
51. (iii) No sooner than the direct action subsides, the police officer concerned shall
authenticate the video by producing the videographer before the Sub-Divisional or
Executive Magistrate who shall record his statement regarding what he did. The
original tapes or CD or other material capable of displaying the recorded evidence
shall be produced before the said Magistrate. It is open to the Magistrate to entrust
 such CD/material to the custody of the police officer or any other person to be
produced in court at the appropriate stage or as and when called for.
52. The Committee felt that offenders arrested for damaging public property shall be
subjected to a still more stringent provision for securing bail. The discretion of the
court in granting bail to such persons should be restricted to cases where the court
feels that there are reasonable grounds to presume that he is not guilty of the offence.
This is in tune with Section 437 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 and certain
other modern criminal law statutes. So we recommend that Section 5 may be
amended for carrying out the above restriction.
53. 11. The recommendations of the Justice Thomas Committee according to us are
wholesome and need to be accepted.
54. 12. To effectuate the modalities for preventive action and adding teeth to the
enquiry/investigation, the following guidelines are to be observed:
55. As soon as there is a demonstration organised:
56. (I) The organiser shall meet the police to review and revise the route to be taken and
to lay down conditions for a peaceful march or protest;
57. (II) All weapons, including knives, lathis and the like shall be prohibited;
58. (III) An undertaking is to be provided by the organisers to ensure a peaceful march
with marshals at each relevant junction;
59. (IV) The police and the State Government shall ensure videograph of such protests to
the maximum extent possible;
60. (V) The person-in-charge to supervise the demonstration shall be SP (if the situation
is confined to the district) and the highest police officer in the State, where the
situation stretches beyond one district;
61. (VI) In the event that demonstrations turn violent, the officer-in-charge shall ensure
that the events are videographed through private operators and also request such
further information from the media and others on the incidents in question;
62. (VII) The police shall immediately inform the State Government with reports on the
events, including damage, if any, caused by the police; and
63. (VIII) The State Government shall prepare a report on the police reports and other
information that may be available to it and shall file a petition including its report in
the High Court or the Supreme Court, as the case may be, for the Court in question to
take suo motu action.
64. In the absence of legislation the following guidelines are to be adopted to assess
damages:
65. (II) Where there is more than one State involved, such action may be taken by the
Supreme Court.
66. (III) In each case, the High Court or the Supreme Court, as the case may be, appoint
a sitting or retired High Court Judge or a sitting or retired District Judge as a Claims
Commissioner to estimate the damages and investigate liability.
67. (IV) An assessor may be appointed to assist the Claims Commissioner.
68. (V) The Claims Commissioner and the assessor may seek instructions from the High
Court or the Supreme Court, as the case may be, to summon the existing video or
other recordings from private and public sources to pinpoint the damage and
establish nexus with the perpetrators of the damage.
69. The principles of absolute liability shall apply once the nexus with the event that
precipitated the damage is established.
70. The liability will be borne by the actual perpetrators of the crime as well as the
organisers of the event giving rise to the liability — to be shared, as finally
determined by the High Court or the Supreme Court, as the case may be.
71. Exemplary damages may be awarded to an extent not greater than twice the amount
of the damages liable to be paid.
72.  Damages shall be assessed for:
(a) damages to public property;
(b) damages to private property;
 (c) damages causing injury or death to a person or persons; and
(d) cost of the actions by the authorities and police to take preventive and
other actions.
73. The Claims Commissioner will make a report to the High Court or the Supreme
Court which will determine the liability after hearing the parties.
74. Hence based on the above cases it is understood that the court has the power to order
for an enqiry into the damages and not only punish the ones responsible but also
provide for compensation.
75. The case also lays down the importance of political party members who not directly
but indirectly are involved in the fuelling of these riots. Therefore it is important to
note that the TMC has also been involved a lot in the vandalising of property during
the riots.
76. That the Chief minister stated that she will not permit the implementation of CAA in
her state, which goes against the federal structure of the constitution which is the
basic structure of the constitution. It is stated that citizenship is a matter on the Union
list (List 1 entry 17) and the state has no say in this regard and hence not letting the
implementation of a matter not in control of the state is Ultra virus and hence in
violation of the basic structure of the Constitution of India.
77. In Destruction of Public &Private Properties9,
78. In Kodungallur film society and ors. V. Union of India10
A. Structural and preventive measures
A. a) In addition to the responsibilities ascribed to the Nodal Officer(s) as set out in
Tehseen Poonawalla (supra), the said Nodal Officer(s) would also be responsible for
creating and maintaining a list containing the various cultural establishments,
including theatres, cinema halls, music venues, performance halls and centres and art
galleries within the district, and pin point vulnerable cultural establishments and
property which have been attacked/damaged by mob violence over the past 5 (five)
years. This list would be updated on a regular basis to account for any new
openings/closings of establishments.
B. b) In addition to the prohibition against weaponry laid down in paragraph 12 (II) of
In Re: Destruction of Public and Private Properties (supra), any person found to be
carrying prohibited weaponry, licensed or otherwise, during protests/demonstrations
would prima facie be presumed to have an intention to commit violence and be
proceeded in that regard as per law.
C. c) The State governments should set up Rapid Response Teams preferably district-
wise which are specially trained to deal with and can be quickly mobilized to
respond to acts of mob violence. These teams can also be stationed around
vulnerable cultural establishments as mentioned hereinabove.
D. d) The State governments should set up special helplines to deal with instances of
mob violence.
E. e) The State police shall create and maintain a cyber-information portal on its
website and on its internet-based application(s) for reporting instances of mob
violence and destruction of public and private properties.
B. Remedies to minimize, if not extirpate, the impending mob violence
F. a) The Nodal Officer(s) will coordinate with local emergency services, including
police stations, fire brigades, hospital and medical services and disaster management
authorities during incidents of mob violence in order to have a comprehensive and
consolidated response to the situation.
G. b) The authorities must consider the use of non-lethal crowd-control devices, like
water cannons and tear gas, which cause minimum injury to people but at the same
time, act as an effective deterrent against mob force.
H. c) The authorities must ensure that arrests of miscreants found on the spot are done

9
(2007) 4 SCC 474
10
  (2018) 10 SCC 713]
 in the right earnest.
I. d) The Nodal Officer(s), may consider taking appropriate steps as per law including
to impose reasonable restrictions on the social media and internet-based
communication services or mobile applications, by invoking enabling provisions of
law during the relevant period of mob violence, if the situation so warrants.
J. e) The Nodal Officer(s) must take coordinated efforts and issue messages across
various audio-visual mediums to restore peace and to stop/control rumours. This can
extend to issuing communications on local TV channels, radio stations, social media
like Twitter etc.
C. Liability of person causing violence
K. a) If a call to violence results in damage to property, either directly or indirectly, and
has been made through a spokesperson or through social media accounts of any
group/organization(s) or by any individual, appropriate action should be taken
against such person(s) including Under Sections 153A, 295A read with 298 and 425
of the Indian Penal Code, 1860.
L. b) In instances where a group/organisation has staged a protest or demonstration
resulting in violence and damage to property, the leaders and office bearers of such
group/organisation should physically present themselves for questioning, on their
own, within 24 (twenty four) hours, in the police station within whose jurisdiction
the violence and damage occurred. Any such person(s) failing to present
himself/herself in such manner without any sufficient reason should be proceeded
against as a suspect and legal process must be initiated forthwith against him/her
including for being declared an absconder in accordance with law.
M. c) A person arrested for either committing or initiating, promoting, instigating or in
any way causing to occur any act of violence which results in loss of life or damage
to property may be granted conditional bail upon depositing the quantified loss
caused due to such violence or furnishing security for such quantified loss. In case of
more than one person involved in such act of violence, each one of them shall be
jointly, severally and vicariously liable to pay the quantified loss. If the loss is yet to
be quantified by the appropriate authority, the judge hearing the bail application may
quantify the amount of tentative damages (which shall be subject to final
determination thereof by the appropriate authority) on the principle stated in
paragraph 15 of the decision in In Re: Destruction of Public and Private Properties
(supra), after hearing the submissions of the State/agency prosecuting the matter in
that regard.
D. Responsibility of police officials
N. a) When any act of violence results in damage to property, concerned police officials
should file FIRs and complete investigation as far as possible within the statutory
period and submit a report in that regard. Any failure to file FIRs and conduct
investigations within the statutory period without sufficient cause should be
considered as dereliction of duty on behalf of the concerned officer and can be
proceeded against by way of departmental action in right earnest.
O. b) Since the Nodal Officer(s) holds the overall responsibility in each district to
prevent mob violence against cultural establishments and against property, any
unexplained and/or unsubstantiated delay in filing FIRs and/or conducting
investigations in that regard should also be deemed to be inaction on the part of the
said Nodal Officer(s).
P. c) With reference to the videography mentioned in paragraphs 5(iv), 10 and 12 of In
Re: Destruction of Public and Private Properties (supra), the officer-in-charge should
first call upon from the panel of local video operators maintained by the concerned
police station to video-record the events. If the said video operators are unable to
record the events for whatever reason or if the officer-in-charge is of the opinion that
supplementary information is required, then he/she can also call upon private video
operators to record the events and request the media for information on the incident
in question, if need be.
Q. d) Status reports of the investigation(s)/trial(s) concerning such offences as set out
hereinabove, including the results of such trial(s), shall be uploaded on the official
website of the concerned State police on a regular basis.
R. e) In the event of acquittal of any person(s) Accused of committing such offences as
set out hereinabove, the Nodal Officer(s) must coordinate with the Public Prosecutor
for filing appeal against such acquittal, in the right earnest.
S. Compensation
T. The person/persons who has/have initiated, promoted, instigated or any way caused
to occur any act of violence against cultural programmes or which results in loss of
life or damage to public or private property either directly or indirectly, shall be
made liable to compensate the victims of such violence.
U. b) Claims arising out of such acts of violence should be dealt with in the manner
prescribed in paragraph 15 of In Re: Destruction of Public and Private Properties
(supra).
V. c) This compensation should be with regard to the loss of life or damage done to any
public or private properties, both movable and immovable properties.

The Petitioner also admits that:

A. The impugned actions/inactions of respondent are otherwise also bad in law.
B. That the present petitioner has not filed any other petition in any High Court or
the Supreme Court of India on the subject matter of the present petition.
C. The petitioner has no other efficacious alternate remedy except to approach this
Hon’ble Court by way of present writ petition.
D. The Annexures annexed to the writ petition are true and correct copies of their
respective originals.

PRAYER

In the facts and circumstances, it is most respectfully prayed that your Lordships may
graciously be pleased to:

1. Issue any appropriate writ, order or directions directing the respondents to compensate
the railways, to take appropriate action against the protesters and to ensure that any such
things and statements does not happen in future.

2. to pass such other orders and further orders as may be deemed necessary on the facts
and in the circumstances of the case; and

3. allow the present petition with costs.

DRAWN BY: FILED BY

 IN THE HON’BLE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

(CIVIL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION)

PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION

WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) NO. OF 2020

IN THE MATTER OF
Arjun singh,
Member of Parliament, Barrackpore constituency
West Bengal
Address:  R/O Holding No. 36, B.L. No. 19/A, Mominpara, Po-PS Jagatdal, Dist 24 Pgs.
(N) Pin-743125 WB ...Petitioner

Versus

1.CHIEF MINISTER OF STATE OF WEST BENGAL

R/o 30B, Harish Chatterjee Street, Kolkata – 700026

2.Government of West Bengal,

Through Chief Secretary
Nabanna, 13th Floor,
Sarat Chatterjee Road,
Shibpur, Howrah- 711102,
West Bengal

3.Deputy Inspector General.

Bhabani Bhawan 1st Floor,
Alipore, Kolkata,
West Bengal 700027
4. Director General
'Government Railway Police Headquarters,
New Secretariat Building,
9th & 2nd Floor, “A” & “B” Block,
1, Kiran Sankar Roy Road,
Kolkata – 700001, 

...Respondents
All respondents are contesting respondents WRIT

AFFIDAVIT

I, Arjun Singh S/o. Sh. Satyanarayan Singh, aged about 57 years, Member of Parliament
Barrackpore constituency ,Address  R/O Holding No. 36, B.L. No. 19/A, Mominpara, Po-
PS Jagatdal, Dist 24 Pgs. (N) Pin-743125 West Bengal India, do hereby solemnly affirm
 and state on Oath as under:-
1. That I Arjun Singh, the Member of Parliament from Barrackpore, West Bengal in

the captioned matter and well conversant with the facts of the case and duly

authorized person and as such competent to swear this affidavit.

2. That the contents of the accompanying Writ Petition (Para to ) (Page to ) and

Misc. Application for Exemption from filing Official Translation (Page …. to

…..) and Annexure-P-1 to P-8 (Page to ….) have been explained to me in my

mother tongue which I understood and say that the contents stated in the Writ

Petition and Misc. Applications are true and correct to the best of my knowledge

and belief and nothing material has been concealed thereof.

3. The annexures are true copies of their respective originals.

DEPONENT

VERIFICATION:

I, the above named deponent, do hereby verify that the contents of paras 1 to 3 of

the above affidavit are true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief, no part

thereof is false and nothing material has been concealed therefrom.

Verified at __ on this the - day of January, 2020.

DEPONENT

INDEX

Sl. Particulars of Document Page No. of part of which it Remarks

No. belongs
Part-I Part-II
(Contents of (Contents of
Paper Book) file alone
(i) (ii) (iii) (iv) (v)
1. Court Fee

2. Listing Proforma

3. Note Sheet NS1 to..

4. Writ Petition with Affidavit 1-16

5. ANNEXURE-P-1:
A photocopy of the PAN Card of the
Petitioner Organization bearing PAN
No.

6. ANNEXURE-P-2:
A true copy of registration certificate
is alongwith with its photocopy of
original.

7. ANNEXURE-P-3:
A photocopy of Board resolution
dated 24.05.018 of the Petitioner
Organisation.

8 ANNEXURE-P-4:
A true copy of National Policy for
Treatment of Rare Diseases (2017).

9. ANNEXURE-P-5:
A true copy of letter dated 06.03.2018
issued by the Deputy Secretary, Govt.
of India.

10. ANNEXURE-P-6:
A true copy of sample letter dated
11.05.2018 issued by the Executive
Director of the Petitioner Addl. Chief
Secretary of Govt. of U.P. & ors.

11. ANNEXURE-P-7:
A photocopy of legal notice dated
05.07.2018 issued on behalf of
Petitioner Organisation to the all
States Chief Secretary alongwith
photocopy of its postal receipt.

12. ANNEXURE-P-8:
A translated copy of letter dated
27.07.2018 received from the Chief
Secretary to Government of
Jharkhand alongwith photocopy of its
original.

13. I.A. No. OF 2018

Application for exemption from filing
the Official Translation.
14. F/M

15. Vakalatnama