'Cannot Take Law Into Their Hands': Calcutta High Court Questions State Over Bulldozer Use By Private Parties To Dispossess Shopkeepers

The Calcutta High Court recently questioned the West Bengal Government over the alleged use of a JCB bulldozer by private parties to dispossess shop owners, observing that private individuals cannot take the law into their own hands merely because there has been a change of regime.

During the hearing, the Court questioned the State authorities on what had transpired and observed:

 “What is happening? They used JCB…”

Justice Saugata Bhattacharya observed that even if the shop owners were found to be squatters, appropriate proceedings ought to be initiated against them, but private parties could not themselves resort to such measures.

“If it is found that they are squatter, proceedings should be initiated. But private parties cannot take law into their own hands after change of regime,” the Court remarked.

The Court also questioned the conduct of the police, observing that they had allegedly remained “mute spectators” while the private parties proceeded with the dispossession.

Additional Advocate General Billwadal Bhattacharya, appearing for the State, informed the Court that the petitioners had subsequently been reinstated by the authorities.

The Court then referred to another matter that had recently come before it, where, according to the Bench, a landowner had dug a large hole outside a shop.

“Another case came to me where a big hole was dug outside a shop, by the landowner,” the Court observed.

The AAG submitted that the wrong had subsequently been undone.

“Wrong is undone,” he told the Court.

The Court observed that if the authorities themselves rectified such actions, judicial intervention should ordinarily not be necessary.

“For that the court is not needed to intervene,” the Court remarked.

The AAG responded: “That is the majesty of our courts.”

The Court, however, reiterated the nature of the grievance, observing that the shopkeeper in the matter had been dispossessed without any order having been passed by any competent authority.

“He was dispossessed without any order from any authority,” the Court observed.