Calcutta High Court Refuses To Interfere With Probe Into Fiasco At Messi In Kolkata Event, Says SIT & Enquiry Panel Can Continue
The Calcutta High Court on Monday refused interim relief in three PILs arising out of the chaotic Lionel Messi event at Salt Lake Stadium on December 13, 2025. Petitioners, including Suvendu Adhikari, sought transfer of the investigation to an independent/central agency, alleging ticket profiteering, misuse of State machinery, and political shielding.
A Bench of Acting Chief Justice Sujoy Paul and Justice Partha Sarathi Sen held that the State-appointed inquiry committee is prima facie valid, noting that a Gazette notification was issued and Section 11 of the Commissions of Inquiry Act empowers the State to constitute such panels.
Rejecting the plea to halt the SIT probe, the Court observed that investigation is a statutory police function and transfer to CBI or another agency is warranted only in rare cases when clear evidence of bias or vitiation exists. The SIT officers' lower rank vis-à-vis senior officials under scrutiny was not sufficient to infer lack of impartiality, the Bench said, invoking the doctrine of necessity.
The Court directed the organiser's vakalatnama to be facilitated by the ACJM, Bidhannagar, and granted timelines for affidavits. The petitions will be heard in February 2026.
Senior counsel for the petitioners argued that the event — branded the GOAT India Tour — was effectively State-sponsored, with tickets allegedly sold for around ₹5,000 to ₹15,000 each and misuse of the State emblem and VIP patronage.
They claimed the failure of crowd control, destruction of public property and suspected flow of unaccounted money required an independent probe. They contended that a committee could not be validly appointed without Assembly resolution, and SIT officers junior to those under scrutiny could not impartially investigate senior officials. They sought court-monitored or central agency investigation and refund to affected spectators.
Kalyan Bandopadhyay, Senior counsel for the state, argued that the Chief Minister promptly ordered an enquiry, and a Gazette notification constituting a committee headed by a retired judge had been issued. Investigation is ongoing and at a preliminary stage; mere allegations do not justify transfer to CBI. The State said ticketing and revenue were controlled by the private organiser and similar events elsewhere raised no complaints. SIT members had no involvement in the event, and doctrine of necessity permits junior officers to investigate seniors.
Counsel for the organisers stated that events in Hyderabad, Mumbai, and Delhi proceeded smoothly under the same organiser, and that tickets were sold via online platforms, not by the State. Allegations were speculative and unsupported by material, counsel argued, while also seeking facilitation of vakalatnama due to custody of the accused organiser.
The Bench held that investigation is a statutory police function and transfer is permissible only in “rare and exceptional” cases when bias or vitiation is shown. At this stage, no material established infirmity in the SIT probe. The Gazette notification satisfied statutory requirements for the enquiry committee. Interim prayers were rejected. The petitions were listed for hearing in February 2026, with directions for filing affidavits and for facilitating counsel access to the organiser for vakalatnama execution.
Accordingly, it refused to grant the relief sought.
Case: Suvendu Adhikari and another vs. The State of West Bengal and others
Case No: WPA(P) 555 of 2025