The Calcutta High Court has quashed criminal proceedings arising from a 2021 FIR against Trina Halder and other State Level Selection Test (SLST) candidates who were booked following a protest over the School Service Commission’s recruitment process during the COVID-19 pandemic.
The petitioners are SLST candidates aggrieved by the School Service Commission’s recruitment process. They said they were protesting peacefully against hunger, unemployment and alleged illegal recruitment and had gone to protest in front of Education Minister Bratya Basu’s residence.
The case, Bidhannagar North Police Station Case No. 169 of 2021, arose from a complaint by Sub-Inspector Suman Roy. He alleged that on August 5, 2021, the candidates gathered near Mayukh Bhawan in Salt Lake and headed towards Bikash Bhawan raising slogans.
According to the complaint, this breached COVID-19 protocols and a prohibitory order under Section 144 CrPC. The protesters allegedly refused to disperse, tried to block public movement and stopped officials from working. Thirteen people, including the six petitioners, were arrested and booked under Sections 143, 188, 341, 269 and 270 IPC and Section 51 of the Disaster Management Act, 2005.
The petitioners claimed protection under Articles 19(1)(a) and 19(1)(b), and said the case would harm their job prospects. The State argued the petition was not maintainable.
Examining the FIR, the Court found that it did not identify an unlawful common purpose necessary to establish an unlawful assembly under Sections 141 and 143 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC). Raising slogans and assembling to protest, by themselves, were insufficient to attract the provision.
The Court noted that the Section 144 CrPC order had not been placed on record and that the FIR did not explain how the protesters obstructed public movement or officials. It also found that no specific person was identified as having been wrongfully restrained under Section 341 IPC.
Regarding Sections 269 and 270 IPC, concerning acts likely to spread infection, the Court noted that the complaint did not allege that the petitioners were infected with COVID-19 or had reason to believe they were carrying the disease.
The allegation of violating COVID-19 protocols under Section 51 of the Disaster Management Act, 2005, was also found insufficiently specific. The FIR did not identify the particular protocol violated or explain how the petitioners obstructed an officer or disobeyed a lawful direction.
Applying the principles laid down by the Supreme Court in State of Haryana v. Bhajan Lal, the Court concluded that the allegations, even if accepted as true, did not establish a prima facie case.
The High Court allowed the writ petition and quashed Bidhannagar North Police Station Case No. 169 of 2021, along with all consequential proceedings, including G.R. Case No. 901 of 2021 pending before the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bidhannagar. The Court made no order as to costs.
Case Title: Trina Halder & Ors. v. The State of West Bengal & Ors.
Case Number: W.P.A. No. 25798 of 2023
