Calcutta High Court Orders CBI Probe Into Killing Of TMC Worker In 2010 Police Firing, Flags Attempts To 'Shield' Erring Cop

The Calcutta High Court has ordered the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) to take over the probe into the alleged 2010 Jangipara police firing which resulted in the death of Trinamool Congress supporter Rabin Ghose, observing that successive police reports, including those by the State CID, appeared aimed at protecting the then Officer-in-Charge of Jangipara Police Station.

Justice Tirthankar Ghosh held that the investigation “failed to satisfy” the constitutional expectation of fairness under Article 21 and noted that the petitioner had alleged her husband was killed in a “false encounter”—a concern earlier recorded even by a coordinate bench.

The petitioner in the case, who was the wife of the deceased worker, was represented by Senior Advocate Kalyan Bandopadhyay.

The Court rebuked the manner in which CID officers filed a final report before the ACJM to avoid judicial scrutiny despite High Court monitoring:

“The purpose of the investigating agency was to avoid the scrutiny of the Hon'ble High Court and in an evasive manner filed the final report… Such conduct prima facie reflects that the purpose was to protect an erring police official from the criminal justice system.”

The judgment records that four eyewitnesses, in statements under Section 164 CrPC, testified that the OC fired from a revolver “from a very close range”, corroborated by a medical board which opined that the firing was a “near shot”.

Despite this, investigators repeatedly relied on inconsistent forensic opinions and ignored ocular evidence. The Court noted:

“Investigating Officers, at successive stages, sought to undermine the ocular testimony by invoking conflicting expert opinions as a means to shield Respondent No. 10.”

Calling the lapse a violation of fundamental rights, the Court said: “To disregard such factual circumstances and to exclusively rely upon medical evidence for discharging the Respondent No. 10 amounts to depriving the petitioner of her right to have a fair investigation. This constitutes violation of Fundamental Rights.”

The Court also took note that the OC continued in his post during probe, that investigation was entrusted to his immediate superior, and that final reports did not explain why contradictory findings of post-mortem doctors were discarded.

Referring to the widow's prolonged fight for accountability, the Court observed: “The petitioner, who has tragically lost her husband, has yet to receive any clarity regarding the cause of his death.”

Justice Ghosh emphasised that even after three reports, concerns persisted: “This Court, notwithstanding the submission of three reports, remains unconvinced and dissatisfied with the manner in which the investigation has been conducted.”

Setting aside the ACJM Serampore's acceptance of the 2022 final report, the Court directed immediate transfer of all case materials to a CBI officer not below the rank of Additional Superintendent of Police and ordered diligent monitoring “so that truth is unearthed”.

Background

On 14 February 2010, during a school managing committee election at Prosadpur High School, Hooghly, political clashes allegedly broke out between CPI(M) and TMC supporters. The widow alleges that OC Tapasbroti Chakraborty, accompanied by ruling party supporters, fired on Rabin Ghose without provocation, resulting in his death.

Three separate FIRs were registered at Jangipara PS—two against political supporters and one (Case No. 25/2010) against the OC under Section 304 IPC. The petitioner alleged that the CID's three successive reports, submitted over eleven years, ignored eyewitness testimony and selectively relied on expert opinions to dilute liability.

A coordinate Bench in 2019 had transferred the investigation to the DIG, CID, noting allegations of a “false encounter.” However, instead of reporting progress to the High Court, CID submitted a final report before the ACJM in April 2022, which has now been set aside.

Case: Latika Ghose -Versus- The State of West Bengal & Ors.

Case No: WPA 35802 of 2013

Click here to read order