Kolkata: The Union Home Ministry on Tuesday informed the Calcutta High Court that it has no objection to increased deployment of central forces in West Bengal if the situation demands in view of allegations of post-poll violence in the state.
The court directed the Center and the West Bengal government to assess the situation following the allegations of post-poll violence made by the petitioners and disclose all relevant facts regarding the same on the next date of hearing on June 21.
During the hearing, Additional Solicitor General Ashok Chakraborty, representing the Union Home Ministry, told the court that he had no objection to increasing the deployment of central forces in the state if the situation demanded.
Counsel for opposition leader Suvendu Adhikari, one of the petitioners in the two PILs, said a report by the West Bengal government said a total of 107 FIRs had been filed till June 12 and 18 of these were not post-related. -Election violence, claiming that it thus acknowledged that post-poll violence was indeed taking place in the state.The seven-phase Lok Sabha elections in West Bengal concluded on 1 June and the results were declared on 4 June.
A division bench headed by Justice Harish Tandon directed that the case be listed for hearing again on June 21, by which date the central forces have already been directed by the court to remain in Bengal.
Adhikari and lawyer Priyanka Tibrewal, in their separate PILs, had alleged that people of a particular political party were being tortured after the conclusion of the Lok Sabha election process.
The division bench, which also included Justice Hiranmoy Bhattacharya, said its main concern was the safety of citizens as serious allegations have been made by the petitioners in the PILs.
Advocate General Kishore Dutta, appearing for the state, said that the state government is doing its job to maintain law and order.Petitioner-lawyer Priyanka Tibrewal claimed that she had a list of 250 people who were thrown out of their homes because of their political beliefs and were living in a dharamshala in Kolkata.
He sought to file a supplementary affidavit in this regard before the court on the next date of hearing.
The court directed the Center and the West Bengal government to assess the situation following the allegations of post-poll violence made by the petitioners and disclose all relevant facts regarding the same on the next date of hearing on June 21.
During the hearing, Additional Solicitor General Ashok Chakraborty, representing the Union Home Ministry, told the court that he had no objection to increasing the deployment of central forces in the state if the situation demanded.
Counsel for opposition leader Suvendu Adhikari, one of the petitioners in the two PILs, said a report by the West Bengal government said a total of 107 FIRs had been filed till June 12 and 18 of these were not post-related. -Election violence, claiming that it thus acknowledged that post-poll violence was indeed taking place in the state.The seven-phase Lok Sabha elections in West Bengal concluded on 1 June and the results were declared on 4 June.
A division bench headed by Justice Harish Tandon directed that the case be listed for hearing again on June 21, by which date the central forces have already been directed by the court to remain in Bengal.
Adhikari and lawyer Priyanka Tibrewal, in their separate PILs, had alleged that people of a particular political party were being tortured after the conclusion of the Lok Sabha election process.
The division bench, which also included Justice Hiranmoy Bhattacharya, said its main concern was the safety of citizens as serious allegations have been made by the petitioners in the PILs.
Advocate General Kishore Dutta, appearing for the state, said that the state government is doing its job to maintain law and order.Petitioner-lawyer Priyanka Tibrewal claimed that she had a list of 250 people who were thrown out of their homes because of their political beliefs and were living in a dharamshala in Kolkata.
He sought to file a supplementary affidavit in this regard before the court on the next date of hearing.
