Kolkata: The anti-gang law, which allows for a pre-trial auction of properties seized from persons suspected of rioting and vandalism, faced its first legal challenge on Sunday. Following the arrest of 14 individuals, police invoked sections 9 and 15A of The West Bengal Maintenance of Public Order (Amendment) Act, 2026 (West Bengal Act of 2026).
A 45-minute courtroom argument over these charges prompted a city court to defer the detailed hearing to Tuesday. The court ordered all 14 accused to remain in police custody for two days.
With these arrests, another state law permitting up to a year of preventive detention — The West Bengal Public Safety and Control of Anti-Social Activities Act, 2026 — became inapplicable, as police chose not to apply it. The legislation actually invoked allows authorities to claim property damages from the accused before a claims commission prior to the conclusion of a trial.
In court on Sunday, public prosecutor Taraknath Pal Mondal informed the bench that sections 9 and 15A of the West Bengal Maintenance of Public Order (Amendment) Act, 2026 had been added against the accused.
The defense team, comprising nearly a dozen lawyers, objected, arguing that while the public prosecutor may petition for the addition of these sections, he cannot assert they have already been added. PP Mondal maintained that the legal process was complete.
The state alleged that the accused threw stones, lathis, and plastic bottles at cops and journalists last Friday following an anti-NEET paper leak protest led by the Left and the Cockroach Janta Party (CJP). Prosecutors stated the violence erupted after organisers failed to produce a valid permit, leading to provocative speeches.
PP Mondal said at least four of the 14 arrested individuals are “habitual offenders,” each facing between two and eight charge sheets. Arguing that the accused could cause further unrest, the PP urged the court to allow custodial interrogation, warning that bail would adversely affect the probe. The court neither granted nor dismissed the bail petition, deferring its decision until Tuesday. The state had requested full police custody through Aug 8.
Earlier in the day, the accused arrived at the court around 2.15 pm amid slogan-shouting by one of the accused and his supporters. A large crowd gathered at the entrance, prompting police to tighten security and erect barricades.
Defense counsel Fazil Ahmed Khan countered that the protest was a democratic movement for education rights.
Another defense lawyer argued that while central authorities engaged with protesters through the CJP and agreed not to press charges, the state took an opposing stance.
Rebutting the defense, PP Mondal stated that medical reports were attached to the case file. He noted that the defense omitted mentions of recovered lathis and the fact that the assembly was unlawful and armed with deadly weapons.
Citing SC precedents on rioting, Mondal submitted all evidence in the case diary.