The Calcutta High Court on Wednesday granted interim protection to former West Bengal Sports Minister Aroop Biswas in connection with an FIR arising out of the alleged egg-pelting incident at the Alipore Court premises, while observing that the growing practice of publicly humiliating accused persons must come to an end.

Justice Saugata Bhattacharya was hearing Biswas' plea challenging the criminal proceedings initiated against him following an incident in which eggs were allegedly thrown at him while he was appearing before the court in connection with another case.

Appearing for Biswas, Senior Advocate Kishore Datta argued that the incident amounted to a serious interference with the administration of justice and deserved to be treated as criminal contempt.

"Lawyers were there with eggs in hand. I feel ashamed to be a part of this fraternity. I will argue that this is criminal contempt... interfering with the course of justice," Datta submitted.

The Court noted that the issue of security and incidents of public humiliation within court premises was already engaging the attention of the High Court in a pending public interest litigation before the Chief Justice.

"Now this matter is pending in a PIL before the Chief Justice. We have read that an SOP is to be formulated," the Court observed.

Datta submitted that such incidents were taking place openly despite the presence of law enforcement authorities.

"Unfortunately, things are being invented and the judiciary had to step in. Everything is happening in front of the police," he argued, adding that his client had fully cooperated with the investigating agency.

The Court remarked that the larger issue extended beyond the present case. "Parading publicly, or egg throwing, this menace has to stop," the Bench observed.

Datta further submitted that after Biswas cooperated with the investigation, members of the media were present when the egg-pelting occurred and the incident was widely broadcast. Clarifying his submissions, he stated that he was not blaming the media but was highlighting the circumstances in which the incident unfolded.

When the Court asked, "How can that be curtailed?", Datta responded, "Not the media, I am showing the frivolity of the complaint against me. Everything has happened in front of the media."

Questioning the FIR itself, Datta pointed out that the complaint had been lodged after a delay of 24 hours, making its genuineness doubtful. He also argued that the offences invoked against Biswas—including attempt to murder, criminal intimidation and outraging the modesty of a woman—were wholly unsustainable.

The Court, however, observed that Biswas was already enjoying interim protection. It directed him to implead the complainant as a party to the proceedings, serve notice and return on the next date.

"You are enjoying a protection. Array the complainant, serve notice and come back. No use of hearing you further," the Court said.

Seeking continuation of the interim relief, Datta requested the Court to protect his client from any coercive action until the matter could be heard again.

"Let them stay their hands till the court hears me. I will come back on the next day. I was sitting in the lawyers' chamber," he submitted.

Accepting the request, the Court directed, "Okay, in the meantime don't take any steps."

The court has also directed the preservation of CCTV footage of the incident.