Form No. J(2) Item No. DL / 03 RANAJIT – A.R.(CT) SUVENDU- A.R.(CT) IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Constitutional Writ Jurisdiction (Appellate Side) W.P.A. NO 20108 OF 2026 Md. Nazibuddin Mondal @ Tulu Mondal -Vs- The State of West Bengal & Ors. BEFORE: THE HON’BLE JUSTICE SAUGATA BHATTACHARYYA For the Petitioner : Mr. Siddharth Dave, Sr. Adv., Mr. Sabyasachi Banerjee, Sr. Adv., Mr. Ayan Bhattacharya, Sr. Adv., Mr. Ankur Chawla, Adv., Mr. Anand Keshari, Adv., Mr. Shivam Tandon, Adv., Mr. Annanda Dubey, Adv., Ms. Alekhya, Adv., Ms. Jhanvi Negi, Adv. For the State : Mr. Surajit Nath Mitra, Ld. AG, Mr. BillwadalBhattacharyya,Ld. AAG, Mr. Kallol Mondal, Ld. PP, Mr. Suryaneel Das, AGP, Mr. Sourav Sengupta, Adv., Mr. Anamitra Banerjee, Adv. Hearing concluded on : 20.08.2026 Judgment on : 20.08.2026 SAUGATA BHATTACHARYYA, J.: 1. By presenting this writ petition, inter alia, petitioner has questioned propriety of FIR in connection with Mohammad Bazar Police Station Case No. 267/2026 dated 30th July, 2026. P a g e | 2 2. Mr. Dave, learned Senior Advocate representing petitioner submits that based on seizure which was made on 29th July, 2026 aforesaid FIR was drawn up and criminal prosecution was initiated which is impermissible and there is no complaint lodged against petitioner prior to such seizure. It is also contended on behalf of petitioner that impugned FIR reveals incorporation of Section 111 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (for short, “BNS, 2023”) though conditions contemplated under Section 111 of BNS, 2023 are not fulfilled which disentitles concerned police authority to fasten Section 111. 3. Notice of this Court has been drawn to Section 111 and definition of “continuing unlawful activity” attributed under Section 111(1)(ii). According to petitioner, in order to attract Section 111 in connection with a criminal prosecution, there has to be filing of more than one charge-sheet before a competent Court within the preceding period of ten years and that Court has taken cognizance of such offence. In the present case, such conditions are absent as contemplated under Section 111(1)(ii) and as such incorporation of Section 111 is bad and impermissible. 4. Reliance is placed on the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court, reported in (2019) 20 SCC 119 (Nevada Properties Private Limited through its Directors v. State of Maharashtra & Anr.) in order to contend that on the strength of Section 106 of BNSS, 2023 P a g e | 3 immovable properties, land, plots and residential house cannot be seized in connection with a criminal prosecution. It is submitted that in the present criminal prosecution immovable properties as described in paragraph 9 of writ petition are being seized/attached which supports the case made out in the writ petition that criminal prosecution is not taken towards right direction requiring interdiction by this Court in entertaining the present writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. 5. During course of argument, Mr. Mitra, learned Advocate General representing State respondents has filed a report in a sealed cover of Inspector-in-Charge, Mohammad Bazar Police Station dated 20th August, 2026 wherefrom it appears that due to alleged acts and actions of petitioner, the Government is incurring huge revenue loss which are connected to stone mining. It is also disclosed in report dated 20th August, 2026 that from seized documents in connection with impugned criminal prosecution it has been found that there are malpractices regarding preparation and issuance of Duplicate Carbon Receipt (DCR). 6. However, at this stage Court is not inclined to narrate alleged acts and actions of petitioner which is subject matter of investigation in connection with Mohammad Bazar Police Station Case No. 267/2026 dated 30th July, 2026. The report dated 20th August, 2026 filed on P a g e | 4 behalf of the State respondents shall be kept with the record in a sealed cover. 7. While opposing the case made out by petitioner, it is submitted on behalf of State respondents that there are two charge-sheets filed, one being Charge Sheet No. 196/26 dated 4th August, 2026 in connection with Mohammad Bazar Police Station FIR No. 216/26 dated 4th July, 2026 and another being Charge Sheet No. 197/26 dated 4th August, 2026 in connection with Mohammad Bazar Police Station FIR No. 220/26 dated 6th July, 2026. According to State respondents, while determining the issue whether in the impugned criminal prosecution Section 111 of the BNS, 2023 needs to be incorporated or not, those two charge-sheets may be taken into consideration. 8. Having considered respective submissions made on behalf of the parties and the case made out in writ petition, this Court finds it apt to consider exercise made by police authorities on 29th July, 2026 and seized cash, gold bars and other items from cupboards kept at the residence of one Md. Minar Mondal. Seizure list prepared on 30th July, 2026 discloses recovery of gold bars and huge amount of cash (Rs.28,53,47,000/-). Movable and immovable properties suspected to be proceeds of crime have been found and based on recoveries investigation is going on. Investigation is at the nascent stage. P a g e | 5 Therefore, at this stage of criminal proceeding, Court finds it improper to make an endeavour to find out veracity of allegations. However, issue which requires consideration is incorporation of Section 111 in impugned criminal prosecution. 9. For better understanding of the term “organized crime” enshrined under Section 111 of the BNS, 2023, said provision is quoted below :- “111. Organized crime.- (1) Any continuing unlawful activity including kidnapping, robbery, vehicle theft, extortion, land grabbing, contract killing, economic offence, cyber-crimes, trafficking of persons, drugs, weapons or illicit goods or services, human trafficking for prostitution or ransom, by any person or a group of persons acting in concert, singly or jointly, either as a member of an organised crime syndicate or on behalf of such syndicate, by use of violence, threat of violence, intimidation, coercion, or by any other unlawful means to obtain direct or indirect material benefit including a financial benefit, shall constitute organised crime. Explanation.- For the purposes of this sub-section,- (i) "organised crime syndicate" means a group of two or more persons who, acting either singly or jointly, as a syndicate or gang indulge in any continuing unlawful activity; (ii) "continuing unlawful activity" means an activity prohibited by law which is a cognizable offence punishable with imprisonment of three years or P a g e | 6 more, undertaken by any person, either singly or jointly, as a member of an organised crime syndicate or on behalf of such syndicate in respect of which more than one charge-sheets have been filed before a competent Court within the preceding period of ten years and that Court has taken cognizance of such offence, and includes economic offence; iⅱ) "economic offence" includes criminal breach of trust, forgery, counterfeiting of currency-notes, bank-notes and Government stamps, hawala transaction, mass-marketing fraud or running any scheme to defraud several persons or doing any act in any manner with a view to defraud any bank or financial institution or any other institution or organisation for obtaining monetary benefits in any form. (2) Whoever commits organised crime shall,- (a) if such offence has resulted in the death of any person, be punished with death or imprisonment for life, and shall also be liable to fine which shall not be less than ten lakh rupees; (b) in any other case, be punished with imprisonment for a term which shall not be less than five years but which may extend to imprisonment for life, and shall also be liable to fine which shall not be less than five lakh rupees. (3) Whoever abets, attempts, conspires or knowingly facilitates the commission of an orgaanised crime, or otherwise engages in any act preparatory to an P a g e | 7 organised crime, shall be punished with imprisonment for a term which shall not be less than five years but which may extend to imprisonment for life, and shall also be liable to fine which shall not be less than five lakh rupees. (4) Any person who is a member of an organised crime syndicate shall be punished with imprisonment for a term which shall not be less than five years but which may extend to imprisonment for life, and shall also be liable to fine which shall not be less than five lakh rupees. (5) Whoever, intentionally, harbours or conceals any person who has committed the offence of an organised crime shall be punished with imprisonment for a term which shall not be less than three years but which may extend to imprisonment for life, and shall also be liable to fine which shall not be less than five lakh rupees: Provided that this sub-section shall not apply to any case in which the harbour of concealment is by the spouse of the offender. (6) Whoever possesses any property derived or obtained from the commission of an organised crime or proceeds of any organised crime or which has been acquired through the organised crime, shall be punishable with imprisonment for a term which shall not be less than three years but which may extend to imprisonment for life and shall also be P a g e | 8 liable to fine which shall not be less than two lakh rupees. (7) If any person on behalf of a member of an organised crime syndicate is, or at any time has been in possession of movable or immovable property which he cannot satisfactorily account for, shall be punishable with imprisonment for a term which shall not be less than three years but which may extend to imprisonment for ten years and shall also be liable to fine which shall not be less than one lakh rupees.” (Emphasis supplied) 10. It has been argued on behalf of petitioner that in order to attract provisions under Section 111 conditions defined under the definition of “continuing unlawful activity” are required to be fulfilled; those conditions are whether against a member of an organized crime syndicate or against such syndicate more than one charge-sheets are filed or not before the competent Court within a preceding period of ten years and Court takes cognizance or not. 11. It appears that two charge-sheets as alluded above both dated 4th August, 2026 were filed in connection with other FIRs. Moreover, while defining “continuing unlawful activity” economic offence was treated separately and separate definition is provided under Section 111(1)(iii) so far “economic offence” is concerned. In the present case, P a g e | 9 apart from section 111 other Sections are 308 /316(2)/316(5)/317(4)/317(5) & 318(3) of BNS, 2023. 12. Considering magnitude of alleged offence and allegations made against petitioner in connection with impugned FIR and taking note of two aforesaid charge-sheets filed in two other separate criminal prosecutions, Court is not inclined to interfere with the decision of respondent authorities to incorporate Section 111 BNS, 2023. 13. Concerned police authorities are directed to investigate the case in accordance with law. 14. Petitioner has an alternative remedy under Section 482 BNSS, 2023 by moving pre-arrest bail application before appropriate forum. 15. In this regard, reliance is placed on the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court, reported in (2021) 19 SCC 401 (Neeharika Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. v. State of Maharashtra & Ors.). Paragraph 33.16 runs infra:- “33.16. The aforesaid parameters would be applicable and/or the aforesaid aspects are required to be considered by the High Court while passing an interim order in a quashing petition in exercise of powers under Section 482 CrPC and/or under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. However, an interim order of stay of investigation during the pendency of the quashing petition can be passed with circumspection. Such an interim order should not require to be passed routinely, casually P a g e | 10 and/or mechanically. Normally, when the investigation is in progress and the facts are hazy and the entire evidence/material is not before the High Court, the High Court should restrain itself from passing the interim order of not to arrest or "no coercive steps to be adopted" and the accused should be relegated to apply for anticipatory bail under Section 438 CrPC before the competent court. The High Court shall not and as such is not justified in passing the order of not to arrest and/or "no coercive steps" either during the investigation or till the investigation is completed and/or till the final report/charge-sheet is filed under Section 173 CrPC, while dismissing/disposing of the quashing petition under Section 482 CrPC and/or under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.” 16. It was succinctly decided in Neeharika Infrastructure (supra) that High Court while exercising writ jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India needs to exercise its power in deciding a writ petition seeking quashment of criminal proceeding sparingly and with circumspection. It is not a routine procedure to pass order thereby directing the concerned police authorities not to take coercive steps specially when allegations are grave in nature and a report is filed before this Court dated 20th August, 2026 by the Inspector-in-Charge, Mohammad Bazar Police Station, Birbhum disclosing alleged acts and actions of petitioner. P a g e | 11 17. Before parting with, it needs to be recorded herein that it is admitted in the writ petition petitioner has left this country on 23rd May, 2026 which does not instil confidence in the mind of this Court. 18. Hence, writ petition stands dismissed. 19. However, this order shall not preclude petitioner to take steps in accordance with law, if so advised. 20. All parties shall act on the server copy of this order duly downloaded from the official website of this Court. (Saugata Bhattacharyya, J.)