Daijiworld Media Network - Kolkata

Kolkata, Dec 23: The Calcutta High Court on Monday refused to interfere at this stage with the investigation being carried out by a Special Investigation Team (SIT) into the chaos that erupted during Argentine football legend Lionel Messi’s event at Salt Lake Stadium on December 13.

A division bench headed by Acting Chief Justice Sujoy Paul observed that the probe is still at a preliminary stage and that no material had been placed before the court to show that the investigation was “vitiated or polluted”. Justice Partha Sarathi Sen was also part of the bench.

The court was hearing three public interest litigations (PILs) seeking transfer of the investigation to the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) and refund of ticket prices to spectators. The petitions were filed after sections of the crowd went on a rampage following the early conclusion of the programme amid disorder, with several people seen crowding around Messi and blocking the view of those seated in the stands.

Rejecting the prayer for interim relief, the bench said it was not inclined to stay or interfere with the ongoing probe at this juncture. The court further held that merely levelling allegations is not sufficient to order transfer of an investigation to the CBI or any other agency.

“In rare and exceptional cases, such directions can be issued only when it is established with accuracy and precision that the investigation is faulted,” the bench observed.

The court directed the West Bengal government and the event organiser to file their affidavits-in-opposition within four weeks, allowing the petitioners two weeks thereafter to file their replies. The PILs, heard analogously, will be taken up again in the week commencing February 16.

During the hearing, the state government submitted that it had not sold the tickets and that the programme was organised by a private event management company. The government also maintained that the SIT was conducting the investigation earnestly, adding that the state Director General of Police had issued a show-cause notice in connection with the incident.

The owner of the event management company, Satadru Dutta, who was arrested shortly after the December 13 event, claimed through his counsel that they were unaware how so many people gained access to the ground, as police were responsible for managing entry points. It was also pointed out that Messi’s events in Hyderabad, Mumbai and Delhi were conducted smoothly.

Counsel for Leader of Opposition Suvendu Adhikari, one of the petitioners, questioned the source of funds used to organise the event and sought a probe by a central agency. Another petitioner’s counsel argued that the enquiry committee formed by the state was administrative in nature and not a judicial commission.

The court noted that the state had produced a gazette notification on the formation of the committee. The government further informed the bench that Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee had expressed regret over the incident and constituted a committee comprising a retired High Court judge and senior administrative officials to look into the matter.