New Delhi, Feb 11 The Supreme Court on Wednesday directed the National Investigation Agency to file a report in a sealed cover before the Calcutta High Court, justifying the invocation of a UAPA provision pertaining to terror acts in a case related to repeated incidents of violence and unrest in West Bengal's Murshidabad district.
The Supreme Court also directed the state government to approach the high court with its grievances against the National Investigation Agency (NIA) probe into the Murshidabad violence case.
During the hearing, the court asked the NIA what was the basis for invoking the provisions of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967 (UAPA), to justify its probe into the recent violence at Beldanga in Murshidabad.
The NIA, which was handed over the probe by the Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA) on January 28, invoked Section 15 (1) (a) of the UAPA in the case.
The provision deals with terrorist acts, which can be slapped on whoever indulging in any act with an intent to threaten the unity, integrity, security, economic security, or sovereignty of India or with an intent to strike terror.
The provision is attracted if “bombs, dynamite or other explosive substances or inflammable substances or firearms or other lethal weapons or poisonous or noxious gases” are used in terror acts.
The bench asked the NIA to file a report in a sealed cover on this aspect in the Calcutta High Court.
It also noted that so far, the state police did not hand over the case diary or relevant documents to the NIA, when the agency concluded that UAPA provisions were attracted in the case.
“Without looking into the documents, you have said Section 15 of UAPA is justified. The case diary was not placed before you… This is a pre-decisional conclusion. Every emotional outburst cannot be packaged as a threat to economic security,” the bench said.
It also referred to similar violence that took place in April 2025, observing that despite the high court granting liberty to the NIA to examine whether it could probe the matter, the agency did not act promptly.
“In April 2025, we saw this kind of violence and the state government also agreed (to an NIA probe). The high court’s division bench asked the NIA to see if a probe can be conducted. But then, the NIA slept over it!” Justice Bagchi said.
The bench was hearing two petitions filed by the West Bengal government challenging the NIA’s probe into the January violence in Beldanga.
One petition assails the Calcutta High Court’s January 20 order observing that it would be open to the Centre to consider an NIA investigation, while the other challenges a January 28 order of the MHA directing the NIA to take over the case.
Additional Solicitor General S V Raju, appearing for the NIA, defended the agency’s decision, citing the use of deadly weapons and the proximity of the area (Beldanga) to the Bangladesh border.
“This is a porous border near Bangladesh. There was violence and deadly weapons were used…We are doing an independent investigation… They (state police) are not handing over the probe papers to us. Please direct them to do so,” he submitted, alleging non-cooperation by the state.
Senior advocate Kalyan Banerjee, representing the West Bengal government, accused the NIA of selective action.
“The NIA is active only in West Bengal!” he said, drawing a sharp rebuttal from the ASG Raju, who said, “Sorry to say, it is well known what is happening there.”
The top court refrained from examining the merits of the dispute and directed that the matter be considered by a division bench of the Calcutta High Court headed by its chief justice, before whom related proceedings are already pending.
“We will ask the NIA to submit a report on this in a sealed cover (to the high court),” the CJI said, adding that the high court should independently assess whether invocation of UAPA was justified.
The bench clarified that it did not express any opinion on the merits of the case and requested the high court to consider the NIA’s status report and pass consequential orders in accordance with law.
On January 20, the high court expressed concern about repeated incidents of violence and unrest in Murshidabad district, and directed the police and the administration to ensure peace is maintained there.
A division bench presided by Chief Justice Sujoy Paul said the state government may requisition central forces if required.
The high court also said that the Central government will peruse reports by the state government to decide on a probe by the NIA.
The MHA, on January 28, ordered an NIA probe in the case.
Two PILs were moved before the high court seeking that central forces be deployed at Beldanga due to the violence that was sparked by alleged attacks on migrant workers in the neighbouring states.
On January 16, protesters blocked NH-12 over the death of a Beldanga resident working as a migrant worker in Jharkhand.
On January 17 morning, similar blockades took place over the alleged heckling of a Murshidabad resident working as a migrant worker in Bihar.