The Calcutta High Court has allowed the Communist Party of India (Marxist) to set up a book stall within 100 metres of its Bongaon party office during Durga Puja, directing police to protect the activity and warning that selective enforcement could create “anarchy”.
Justice Saugata Bhattacharyya directed the Bongaon superintendent of police and the inspector-in-charge of Bongaon Police Station to ensure that CPM workers could erect the stall and sell books without obstruction. The police were also told to deploy additional personnel, if necessary, to maintain peace. The SP has been asked to submit an action-taken report, and the matter will be heard again on November 23.
The court’s order followed a dispute over a stall near a Durga Puja pandal outside the CPM office. According to the report before the court, people allegedly associated with Hindu Jagran Mancha assaulted and threatened CPM workers on October 6 while they were putting up the stall. The CPM said it had been operating book stalls at the location for decades. The mancha allegedly later erected its own stall at the same site.
The judge observed that if other groups were allowed to sell different items by putting up stalls during the festival, the CPM should not be prevented from selling books. The court also said that the dissemination of different political thoughts and ideologies was welcome in a democracy, and expressed the expectation that people associated with different political ideologies would be able to express their views.
The state government opposed the petition. Advocate General Surajit Nath Mitra and Additional Advocate General Bilwadal Bhattacharyya argued that the dispute concerned land rather than police action. The state maintained that the police did not have the power to ensure any construction and that such questions belonged before a civil court.
The court questioned the consequences of that position, asking whether it would allow one group to erect a stall while another was prevented from doing so. Justice Bhattacharyya said that if the authorities opposed all stalls, the police could be directed to remove every structure. But allowing one organisation to operate while stopping another, he observed, would send the wrong message.
The judge also referred to the possibility of a “pick and choose” policy and questioned why the police had sought clarification about permissions from other stall operators when the CPM’s stall was being challenged. Senior advocate Bikash Ranjan Bhattacharyya, appearing for the CPM, said the appeal before the division bench had been filed by the Bongaon police inspector and described the approach as evidence of bias.
The state had approached a division bench headed by Chief Justice Ravindra Vithalrao Ghuge, but the matter was returned to the single bench. The state subsequently sought a stay on the order, which the court refused. The next hearing is scheduled for November 23, when the court is expected to consider the police action-taken report.
