Arya Pratinidhi Sabha and Anr. Vs State of West Bengal and Ors. — Calcutta HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

Arya Pratinidhi Sabha and Anr. Vs State of West Bengal and Ors. — Calcutta HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Writ petition disposed of with no order as to costs; petitioners given liberty to seek redressal before the jurisdictional Magistrate under Section 175 BNSS and to approach the appropriate forum for recovery of possession; police authority directed to keep strict vigil and ensure maintenance of peace and tranquility; allegations deemed not admitted since no affidavits were invited.

Issue for consideration

Whether the petitioners, elected in terms of the Memorandum of Association and Bye-laws of Arya Pratinidhi Sabha, Bengal, remain the legitimate executive committee, vis-a-vis the private respondents who allegedly held a parallel election, declared themselves members, and ousted the petitioners and legitimate members from the premises. +2 more

Court's answer

The material on record demonstrates an internal dispute between two factions of the Sabha comprising the petitioners and the private respondents.

Ratio / Principle

The petitioners are at liberty to take necessary steps before the jurisdictional Magistrate under Section 175 of the BNSS for redressal of their grievance regarding the police authority's non-action on their complaint.

Key takeaways

The petitioners are also at liberty to approach the appropriate forum for recovery of possession as sought in the writ petition.ratio¶10
In the meantime, the police authority shall keep strict vigil in the area in order to avoid any untoward incident, in view of the strained relationship between the parties.ratio¶11
The police authority shall ensure maintenance of peace and tranquility between the parties.ratio

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Writ petition concerning a factional dispute over control of the executive committee of Arya Pratinidhi Sabha, Bengal. Petitioners, claiming election in terms of the Sabha's Memorandum of Association and Bye-laws, alleged that private respondents organised a parallel election during the pendency of the election process, declared themselves committee members, and ousted the petitioners and legitimate members from the premises; their police complaint went unacted upon, and a State enquiry reportedly found the allegations unsubstantiated. Private respondents, challenging maintainability, contended they were elected office bearers on February 01, 2026 and had functioned since. Finding an internal dispute between two factions, the Court disposed of the writ petition, granted the petitioners liberty to seek redressal before the jurisdictional Magistrate under Section 175 of the BNSS and to approach the appropriate forum for recovery of possession, and directed the police authority to keep strict vigil and ensure maintenance of peace and tranquility. No order as to costs; allegations deemed not admitted as no affidavits were invited. Bench: Suvra Ghosh, J. Decision dated 24.02.2026.

24.02.2026 rc/ct.no.05 Item No.30

WPA No. 3290 of 2026 Arya Pratinidhi Sabha & Anr. Versus The State of West Bengal & Ors.

Mr. Sandip Kumar De Mr. Abhik Chitta Kundu ….for the Petitioners Mr. Suman Sengupta Mr. Pradyut Kumar Das Mr. Sanatan Panja ….for the State Mr. Shankar Prasad Dalapati Mr. Mritunjoy Saha …for the respondent nos.5&6 Mr. Sankar Biswas Mr. Debnath Mahata …for the respondent no.9

Affidavit of service filed by the petitioners and report submitted by the State are taken on record.

The petitioners allege that though the petitioners and office bearers are still members of the executive committee of the Arya Pratinidhi Sabha, Bengal upon being elected through a process of election in terms of the Memorandum of Association and Bye-laws of the Sabha, the private respondents have surreptitiously organized a parallal election during pendency of the election process of the committee, have illegally declared themselves to be the members of the committee and have ousted the petitioners and the legitimate members from the premises. The petitioners lodged a complaint before the police authority which has not been acted upon.

2

Challenging the maintainability of the writ petition, learned counsels for the private respondents submit that pursuant to an election of the executive committee, the private respondents have been elected as office bearers of the committee on February 01, 2026 and have been performing the functions of the committee since then.

The said contention is denied and disputed by the petitioners.

Learned counsel for the State submits that an enquiry has been held pursuant to the complaint lodged by the petitioners and it is found that the allegations have not been substantiated.

Upon consideration of the submission made on behalf of the parties, this Court is of the view that the material on record demonstrate an internal dispute between two factions of the Sabha comprising the petitioners and the private respondents. Since the petitioners complain that complaint lodged by them before the police authority has not been considered in its proper perspective, they are at liberty to take necessary steps before the jurisdictional Magistrate under Section 175 of the BNSS for redressal of their grievance. They are also at liberty to approach the appropriate forum for recovery of possession as sought in the writ petition.

In the meantime, the police authority shall keep strict vigil in the area in order to avoid any untoward incident in view of the strained relationship between the

3

parties and shall ensure maintenance of peace and tranquility.

The writ petition is disposed of.

There shall, however, be no order as to costs.

Since no affidavit is invited, the allegations contained in the writ petition are deemed not to have been admitted.

Urgent certified website copy of this order, if applied for, be supplied to the parties upon compliance with all requisite formalities.

(Suvra Ghosh,J)