Imteaz Ahmed v. The State Of West Bengal And ORS.

August 6, 2025 Sl. No.7 Court No.8 s.biswas WPA(P) 348 of 2021 Imteaz Ahmed vs.

The State of West Bengal and others Mr. Rabi Sankar Chattapadhyay Mr. Anindya Sundar Das Ms. Paromita Mondal Ms. Suva Gayen Mr. Suman Halder ... for the petitioner Mr. Amitabrata Ray, GP Mr. Nilotpal Chatterjee ... for the State

1. Heard learned counsel for the parties.

2. This PIL has been filed in the year 2021. In the PIL, the petitioner prays for following relief: a) Issue a Writ and/or order and/or direction in the nature of Mandamus and/or any other appropriate writ or order directing the respondent no.5 to investigate into the matter of illegal accumulation of wealth and property by the private respondent as declared in her election affidavit as in annexure P/1 and into the source of such income and into the annual income declared by the private respondent in her election affidavit as in annexure P/1 and to arrest the private respondent and her accomplices and report to this Hon'ble Court after specified intervals and/or when this Hon'ble Court directs.

b) Issue a Writ of and/or in the nature of Mandamus commanding the respondents and each of them and/or their concerned authorities to complete investigation and trial in such offence as aforesaid in a time bound manner, in the interest of justice.

c) A Writ and/or in the nature of Certiorari do issue calling upon the respondent authorities to transmit all the records of this case before this Hon'ble Court so that conscionable justice may be made.

3. The State filed its response wayback on 23.09.2023. No exception to the said response is filed till date. On 30th July, 2025, it was made clear that no further time will be granted and the matter was adjourned as a last indulgence. In a nutshell, the whole case of the petitioner is founded upon the affidavit filed by the private respondent.

4. The prayer of the petitioner to investigate into the matter of illegal alleged accumulation of wealth and property by private respondent. On a specific query from the Bench as to whether there exists prima facie materials to show that the said wealth is illegally acquired, the learned counsel for the petitioner submits that there is no such material and this is a matter of investigation.

5. In our opinion, this court cannot conduct roving enquiry on such a prayer. It is obligatory on the part of the petitioner to at least categorically plead and provide some cogent material to show that the property/wealth is illegally accumulated. In absence thereof, no interference is warranted by this court.

6. The public interest litigation stands dismissed. (Sujoy Paul, J.) (Smita Das De, J.)