JAY SENGUPTA
Rahaman Baidya – Appellant
Versus
State of West Bengal – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
JAY SENGUPTA, J.
1. This is an application alleging police inaction and seeking police protection.
2. Report filed by the State is taken on record.
3. A copy of the notice purportedly given by Jibantala Police Station under Section 160 of the Code to the petitioners as filed in Court is also taken on record.
4. Learned advocate for the petitioners submits as follows. The petitioners had come to know about defalcation of huge sums of money committed by the panchayat authorities in collusion with others in respect of Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Guarantee and other Schemes. They were afraid to bring this to light immediately before the police. So, they directly approach the National Human Rights Commission. The Commission directed an enquiry. The same was done and a totally different picture was given about a family dispute. The Commission did not agree with the same and directed further inquiry. Some local anti social elements had come to know about the issue. They had taken the petitioner No. 2 to the office of the ruling political party, scolded and assaulted him. The petitioner No. 1 had to flee the place and is unable to return in fear of life. They made complaint to the
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.